Theologies of Power and Crisis

Envisioning / Embodying Christianity in Hong Kong

Pavey

• Publisher: Pickwick Publications
• Year: 2011
• eBook ISBN: 9781630876319
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Religion

Theologies of Power and Crisis provides a case study for Eric Wolf's research directive to better comprehend the interplay of cultural (webs of meaning) and material (webs of power) forms of social life. More specifically, the book demonstrates how theological discourse and practice engage with historical and material relations of power. It has been normative to speak of power in terms of political and economic processes and theology in terms of interpretive and symbolic experiences. This work breaks new ground by linking theological ideas with political-economic processes in terms of the structural relations of power.Ethnographically, this research investigates the theological processes of Hong Kong Chinese Christians during a period of significant social change and crisis, precipitated by the return of Hong Kong to China in 1997. It shows how local Christians and Christian institutions mediated the significant regional, national, and transnational forces of political-economic change by connecting theological practice to the structural relations of power. The Christian response was a contested process closely intertwined with the broader contested processes of social organization.This study develops an understanding of Christianity that goes beyond ecclesiastical hegemony to encompass struggles over human practice, meaning, and representation in relation to the changing political-economic context. These findings implicate religious ideas and practice as significant to an understanding of social inequalities and powerlessness by connecting ideologies to material conditions. Christian ideas may be used to legitimize an oppressive social order or they may be used to liberate those who are oppressed. Issues related to the policies and practice of development should take seriously the role of religious beliefs and practices.

1

Entrée into the Field

July 1, 1997—The Hong Kong Handover

A black Rolls Royce pulled up in front of the Mandarin Oriental Hotel, the luxury hotel situated along Victoria Harbor on Hong Kong Island located in the middle of Hong Kong’s big business district. My wife and I stood just outside with several friends waiting on a mutual friend from Taiwan to close a deal in the hotel’s cigar lounge on the opening of a new bar in the expensive mid levels district. Fancy cars had been pulling up for the last hour to escort the privileged guests to the newly built Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Centre not far away in Wanchai where they would participate in the handover events only a few hours away. I jokingly said to my friends, “get your cameras ready, the next person to come out will be Margaret Thatcher.” They laughed. But seconds later our laughter turned to gasps when none other than Lady Thatcher emerged from the entrance, just a hand shake from where we stood, and was quickly whisked away in the black Rolls. The excitement of the handover ceremonies was just beginning.

We had come to Hong Kong with one million other visitors including eight thousand registered journalists and photographers to witness with the 6.5 million Hong Kong residents the return of Hong Kong to her motherland. On July 1st, 1997, China would resume sovereignty over Hong Kong after 156 years of British control. Britain would hand over the New Territories, whose ninety-nine-year lease had expired, as well as Kowloon and Hong Kong Island, land that had been acquired through the “unequal treaties” of 1842 and 1860. According to the Sino-British Joint Declaration worked out in December 1984 between Margaret Thatcher and Deng Xiaoping, China guaranteed a “high degree of autonomy” for Hong Kong people in all matters “except in foreign and defense affairs” under Deng’s “one country, two systems” policy. “Hong Kong’s previous capitalist system and life-style shall remain unchanged for fifty years” (Joint Declaration 1984 and Basic Law 1989). Although no “significant” change was to occur, the world’s spotlight was now focused on Hong Kong. Why? The flags of other European powers had been lowered on many other colonies before. This handover, however, was unique in several ways.

Politically, Hong Kong, unlike most other colonies who gained independence, would be transferred from a Western sovereign, who advocated democracy (under Christopher Patten’s leadership), to an authoritarian state, the People’s Republic of China. Could the Hong Kong handover process be better characterized as re-colonization rather than de-colonization? Economically, as one of the world’s richest and major financial centers, Hong Kong would be returned to a much poorer sovereign who was just beginning to experiment with free market economies. How would China treat its “golden egg?” Would Hong Kong eventually fall in the shadows of Shanghai? Socially, Hong Kong is an open, global, and multifarious space that now faced the reality of a return to a motherland that hesitates little to intrude into community and individual’s private lives. The June 4, 1989, Tiananmen incident poignantly awakened the Hong Kong people to their love of China’s people and at the same time to the values they cherished as Hong Kong people. This is why we were all there. We were waiting to see what it would mean politically, economically, and socially to live in “one country” under “two systems.”

Shortly after we caught a glimpse of Margaret Thatcher, our friend returned. Despite misty and cloudy weather, we hurried up the peak to the Government House so we could see Governor Patten and his family bid farewell to their home of five years. From the Mandarin Oriental we made our way slowly through Statue Square and the maze of thousands of Filipino female migrants, most who work as domestic servants, gathered in hundreds of small groups to eat, chat, sing, and dance. I wondered what Hong Kong’s future held for them. Passing under the high tech computer controlled Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank that looks something like a space ship, we followed a narrow path that cut through the gardens next to St. John’s Cathedral, a very traditional colonial structure built in 1847. We oriented our path in relation to the second largest building in Hong Kong, the modern triangular Bank of China designed by I. M. Pei, which stands seventy-four floors high just to the east of the Government House. The closer we got to the Patten residence, the larger the crowd became. We eventually came to an abrupt stop sandwiched in between people and tall buildings. There was a great deal of excitement in the air. Finally, a cheer went up from the crowd and we caught a brief glimpse of the Governor’s car on its way to the Convention Centre after just making its triple trip around the home for good-luck, according to local belief, to ensure that the departing person would return again safely. The crowd rushed forward, carrying us along, to attempt an entrance into the official residence. Instead, we were met by a frustrated police force who had formed a human chain and threatened, through a megaphone, to resort to violence if necessary. We dispersed as quickly as possible.

The farewell ceremonies were just about to begin anyway. These ceremonies, long planned for at Hong Kong’s tallest and most expensive venues, would largely be restricted to a list of invitees and the press. My wife Luella and I managed to make one of those lists for a dinner party on the top of the YMCA building, one of the highest vantage points on the Kowloon side of Victoria harbor across from Hong Kong Island. We managed this through guanxi (connections) with a friend whose father was on the board of directors of the YMCA Salisbury Hotel. After a delicious meal, we made our way out onto the roof with the other dignitaries to watch the HK$3.9 million fireworks display. It was a fantastic one-hour pyrotechnic extravaganza of nearly twenty thousand explosions over Victoria Harbor against the backdrop of one of the world’s most dramatic cityscapes of Hong Kong Island. The natural beauty of Victoria Peak at 522 meters rises just above the hundreds of tall sky skyscrapers, now decorated with colorful lights that hug the crowded shoreline of the island. A crowd of over 420 thousand people pressed shoulder to shoulder in the streets below along the waterfront as we mingled with the VIP guests dressed in black tie attire sipping champagne in comfort. The loud booms, bright colors, and fantastic scene shook and marveled the crowd. President Jiang Zemin, Premier Li Peng, Prince Charles, and Governor Patten all were waiting just across the river in the Convention center for the handover ceremonies that were to begin at 11:00 p.m.

After the fireworks, we joined the massive crowds below in the streets of Tsimshatsui where the festivity and craziness of the occasion was much more intense. Hong Kong’s main tourist district, usually filled with the hustle and bustle of shopping, now hosted the chaotic festivities of the handover celebration. We joined this dizzying sea of humanity in its slow movement through the closed-off streets of Tsimshatsui and into the numerous MTR (subway) stations to return home to our television sets. We returned to our temporary residence, the home of a Taiwanese family, just in time to watch the end of the official handover ceremony. The mood was solemn on TV. I could only make out parts of the conversation in Mandarin Chinese our host family was having around us. I certainly could not miss that they were making fun of Jiang’s speech and the way that he and the Chinese officials would clap for themselves every few minutes. At midnight, Governor Patten and his family along with Prince Charles boarded the royal yacht Britannia to begin their journey home, formally ending the 156 years of British rule in Hong Kong.

This snapshot tourist peek into the handover events discloses little more than what the world saw on television. It does not easily reveal the changes that have taken place since the signing of the Joint Declaration in 1984 or the changes that will occur over the next fifty years. This more complex picture of Hong Kong particularly of the place of Christianity is what I hope I captured in this research when I returned after the handover events.

2

Overview

At this millennial transition, the human capacity to envision imaginary worlds seems to be shifting into high gear. For anthropologists and others, greater concern with how ideas and power converge seems eminently warranted.

—Eric Wolf, Envisioning Power

Introduction

The research in this book follows the directive of Eric Wolf in Envisioning Power to better understand the relationship of ideas and power grounded in case study research. I use the perceived crisis of the “1997 handover” of Hong Kong to Mainland China (1982–1997) as a case study to explore “the relations of power that are played out in social arrangements and cultural configurations, and to trace out the possible ways in which these relations of power implicate ideas” (Wolf 1999, 3). This research pursues two primary questions: How did Hong Kong Christians respond ideationally in theological terms to the perceived crisis and how were these ideas and the actions based on them embedded in material and historical processes of structural power?

More specifically, this research seeks to explain what Wolf calls the “problem of cosmology” or the problem of “imaginary worlds” by investigating the theological processes of the Hong Kong Christian community (1999, 280–81). I am concerned with understanding how theological discourses and practices “engage with the material resources and organizational arrangements they try to affect or transform” (1999, 280). How the Hong Kong Christian community creates and experiences Christianity—socially, politically, and economically is a problem I explore as an attempt to understand how power and ideas connect through the social domain of theology. The research examines the theological discourses and practices as a contested dynamic dialectical process of meaning making and power wielding. This research demonstrates both how structural relations of power legitimize and constrain theological discourse and practice on the one hand and on the other how theological agency may also resist power relations that legitimize exploitation and injustice. This work begins what might be called a political economy of theological practice. It is normative to think of power in terms of political and economic processes. However, when we think of theology, power is rarely implicated as significant to the discussion. This study links theologies to political and economic processes in terms of historical and structural relations of power. This study will contribute to a better understanding of the role theological discourse and practice play in politics and economics, as well as contributing to a broader understanding of the relationship between power (material) and ideas (symbolic).

Ethnographically, this research situates itself in Hong Kong during the period that marks the return of Hong Kong to China. The geographic location and historic context provide a context of significant perceived crisis and culture change within which to study the response of Hong Kong Christians. The year 1982 marks an important shift in theological practice for Hong Kong Christians when formal talks began between Britain and China over how to handle the July 1, 1997, terminus of a ninety-nine year lease on the New Territories. This research examines the relationship between Hong Kong Christianity and the reshaping of structural relations of power. Christian organizations played a significant role in shaping Hong Kong’s history and socio-cultural environment. This research examines the ongoing influence and changing roles of the Christian community in the broader Hong Kong context as well as the political, economic, and social implications of the change of sovereignty on the local Hong Kong Chinese Christian population.

On July 1, 1997, China resumed sovereignty over Hong Kong after 156 years of British control making it the Hong Kong Special Admin-istrative Region of the People’s Republic of China (HKSAR). The viability of Hong Kong poses concerns not only for local residents but also for wider regional and international interests in Mainland China, Taiwan, the Pacific Rim, and western multinational corporations. China’s administrative policies promise stability and no “significant” changes. According to the Sino-British Joint Declaration worked out in December 1984 between Margaret Thatcher and Deng Xiaoping, China guarantees a “high degree of autonomy” for Hong Kong people in all matters “except in foreign and defense affairs” following Deng’s “one country, two systems” policy. Hong Kong’s previous capitalist system and life-style are to remain unchanged for fifty years (Joint Declaration 1984 and Basic Law 1989). Of particular interest to this research project, the Sino-British Joint Declaration (1984) and the Basic Law (1989, article 32, 141) both stipulate that Hong Kong’s religious freedoms will be protected based on the principles of “non-subordination, non-interference, and mutual respect.” Yet, the implementation of these policies in practice poses real challenges to local Hong Kong Chinese communities (Ma 1997; Siu 1997; Chan 1998; Choi 1998; Man and Lo 1998; Feng 1998).

This proposed research seeks to better comprehend the interplay of cultural and material forms of social life by focusing on the political, economic, and social implications of this change of sovereignty on the theological discourse and practice of local Hong Kong Chinese Christians. This community is of particular interest for several reasons: (1) the long and significant history of Christianity within the unique colonial situation of Hong Kong and the China region, (2) it’s local significance concerning relations of power and the complicity between church, government and business communities, and (3) it’s theoretical significance connecting power and ideas and further theology with political-economy studies.

Finally, it would be a mistake to understand the problems this research addresses as innocuous theoretical problems pertinent only for academic purposes. This would belie the urgency and potency of the problems faced by humanity today concerning destructive maladaptive human behavior that is legitimized through sacred ideologies and sanctified authorities. I view anthropology along with Wolf as a “critical tool with which to address social concerns” that could be “used to create a better world” (2001, 2, 8). Out of a desire to ameliorate social suffering, Wolf studies the problematic relationship between power and ideas, especially in Envisioning Power, and for similar reasons I follow his research directive. As Wolf puts it, “there is a crucial link, to be understood much better than we do now, between interest and morality” (2001, 165). I agree with Aihwa Ong that we have a “moral obligation to understand how power relations work” (Ong 1995). Again, Wolf says, “We stand at the end of a century marked by colonial expansion, world wars, revolutions, and conflicts over religion that have occasioned great social suffering and cost millions of lives. These upheavals have entailed massive plays and displays of power, but ideas have had a central role in all of them. Ideas have been used to glorify or criticize social arrangements . . .” (1999, 1). I am interested in going beyond description and interpretation in an attempt to seek explanations in order to address social concerns facing humanity that involve Christendom and religion. Roy Rappaport challenges me to do “engaged” anthropology or engage in “The Anthropology of Trouble” (1993; 1994). This research explores then the “pathologies” of Christian theologies (Rappaport 1999) in order to write against the sanctification of discourse and practice that exploit the powerless and protect structural relations of power that benefit the powerful. This research embraces a critical anthropological perspective to expose the contradictions of ecclesiastical hegemonies in Hong Kong that appear to be accepted by the society as natural and inviolable.

Eric Wolf states well the central problem that I bring to this research project. Concerning “systems of symbolic action,” there is truth in the notion that they can be “mechanisms of domination and exploitation.” Yet “there is also concrete truth in the notion advanced by others that systems of religious belief and practice can be modes of resistance against conquerors and exploiters. What we have not yet done systematically is to look at the multiplicity of symbolic actions as ideology, as expressions of different interests and aspirations embodied in cultural forms” (2001[19...

Table of contents

• Title Page
• Foreword
• Acknowledgments
• Chapter 1: Entrée into the Field
• Chapter 2: Overview
• Chapter 3: Descriptive Integration
• Chapter 4: Unholy Alliance—Theologies of Dominance and Crisis
• Chapter 5: Prophetic Imagination—Theological Alternatives to Power
• Chapter 6: Conclusions
• Afterword
• Bibliography