AHC: Widespread Christianity in China

[redfire]

Despite lurking the site for sometime, this is my first actual thread. I'm extremely interested in Christianity in China and what forms it would take as it was blended with local culture. What would be the neccesary POD be to make Christianity the dominant religion in China? In addition, how would this new branch of Christianity influence it's European counterpart? The earliest possible POD is preferable.

[Zuvarq]

The Taiping Rebellion had a good change at success I think until... 1860?

[LSCatilina]

You have four possible PODs.

1) Nestorian China.
"Nestorianism" (in fact probably a variant of it adapted to China) existed and have followers up to the VIII century. If the emperor Wuzong didn't banned the "foreign" cults in 845, maybe this eastern church could survive long enough to have a plurality.

2) Catholic China : Middle-Age
In the XII century, you had 10 catholic bishopries in China with a special Patriarch. They tended to absorb the nestorian churches, stregthening their presence. Again the interdiction of foreign religions deemed this presence, as well the relative indifference of west towards this far-eastern church.

3) Catholic China : Jesuits.
They managed to make themselves accepted as scientists and advisors, thanks to their knowledge and mastering of Chinese language and culture.
The emperor allowed the conversion and the cult, as it didn't looked dangerous for the Empire.

But the chinese culture posed some issues : were cult of ancestors religion or just tradition? Among others such problems, Rome proclaimed that they had to choose between their traditional cults (religious or not really religious) or Christianism.

The emperor choose.

4) Somewhat Christian China : Taiping Rebellion sucessful

With their own conception of christianism, a sucessful taiping rebellion could have made it mandatory and widespreading it. Now, that"s not really likely, but it had to be mentioned.

[Riain]

Nestoriansim had a reasonable foothold in China from about 700AD, perhaps that could be what is built on.

[Simreeve]

There were still Nestorians amongst the steppe tribes in Genghiz Khan's time: Have him converted (probably in his youth, before he restored the leadership over the Mongols that his father had lost, I'd say whilst a guest with one of the tribes where that faith was common) and his family then promote the church extensively in their conquered lands.

[Fredrick II Barbarossa]

probably very tough... The confusians and buddhists did not like giving up the power they had and even up till the qing were the most influential groups in china alongside the daos and taoists. So it is frankly impossible to get china christian because it is already in the fold of these other four religious which do their own conversions and which most chinese have followed since like b.c. times. After 1930s its too late due to the fact that you have the communists in power banning all religions and turning china into an atheist country or at least weakening all other religions. Thus unless you have a pod where either confucious or buddha are not born or their religions never arise then you could have a christian china. that too is very tough because due to pod christianity could be butterflied away completely.

As for mongols doubt it otl they were super tolerant of other religions till like the golden horde and sunni illkhanate. so that too is unlikely.

[Riain]

What about the Nestorians gaining a powerful niche in Chinese society, which is common enough practice in the East? If they find a niche for themselves they won't be squeezed like they were IOTL, they'll become an important part of elite politics.

[MerryPrankster]

Originally Posted by Simreeve

There were still Nestorians amongst the steppe tribes in Genghiz Khan's time: Have him converted (probably in his youth, before he restored the leadership over the Mongols that his father had lost, I'd say whilst a guest with one of the tribes where that faith was common) and his family then promote the church extensively in their conquered lands.

Part of the Mongols' success was due to their religious toleration. If GK becomes a Nestorian Christian, he'll need to avoid being too pushy about it.

[PoorBoy]

The POD can actually be as late as the Communists not taking control of China. Christianity may not end up as the majority religion as in Korea, but 10% of one billion is still a pretty formidable number.

[Evan]

Some people have said Kublai Khan's mother was a (Nestorian) Christian. Be that as it may, he was quite interested in Christianity and asked the Pope to send missionary bishops. A couple bishops came along with Marco Polo, but they all turned back partway through the journey. Perhaps that could be a PoD, though it's probably too late?

[WhatIsAUserName]

Religion in China generally changes at a slow pace. As in, Buddhism was introduced as early as 65 CE. Confucians continued to oppose it for over 1000 years. At least as late until Wang Fuzhi in the 1690s, many Confucians disliked it. So, Christianity would take a long time to reach majority status, and the best way to get this would as early as possible. Getting rid of Buddhism's influence in some way would be necessary, or else it's going to face a crowded religious field, with ideas from Buddhism, Daoism, and Confucianism all interacting with it and changing it. That's why I propose that Tang Wuzong is too late for a point of divergence. A major point: in 845, Buddhist, Nestorian Christian, and Zoroastrian clergy were laicized. There were about 250,000 of the former, and 3,000 of the latter two combined. In other words, the 845 Christian population was about 1% of the size of the contemporary Buddhist population. That, in other words, is way too late. Buddhism has already become too popular. Even if Tang Wuzong banned Buddhism but allowed for Christianity to exist, the anti-Buddhist persecutions are going to end, and Christianity will be eclipsed once more.

I propose, instead, that if Shi Le, who was the first of the non-Chinese invaders to support Buddhism, supported Christianity instead, it might be a bit more possible, though I'm not sure whether Christianity entered China already.

[Evan]

Originally Posted by WhatIsAUserName

I propose, instead, that if Shi Le, who was the first of the non-Chinese invaders to support Buddhism, supported Christianity instead, it might be a bit more possible, though I'm not sure whether Christianity entered China already.

The earliest inarguable evidence of Christianity there is in 635, though some maintain there was a metropolitan bishop appointed in China in 411. You could probably butterfly it to the 280's, though it'd be a stretch; Christianity was well-established in Persia by then.

[WhatIsAUserName]

Originally Posted by Evan

The earliest inarguable evidence of Christianity there is in 635, though some maintain there was a metropolitan bishop appointed in China in 411. You could probably butterfly it to the 280's, though it'd be a stretch; Christianity was well-established in Persia by then.

Well, there was the Persian prince An Shigao who worked as a translator of Buddhist texts in Luoyang, during the Eastern Han. Maybe an increase in Christian Persians in Luoyang leads to a conversion of one of the foreign nomads, who then support Christianity? The Persian connection seems strong enough, since I'm not sure what other Christian communities are large enough to proselytize in China.

[LSCatilina]

Originally Posted by Evan

The earliest inarguable evidence of Christianity there is in 635, though some maintain there was a metropolitan bishop appointed in China in 411. You could probably butterfly it to the 280's, though it'd be a stretch; Christianity was well-established in Persia by then.

What about the carving on Kong When, that are dated from the first century, ca. 70?



It would apparently revolves around the predication made to a chinese governor, up to a mention of the emperor.

[Iori]

The Taiping Rebellion really should'nt be counted as they may have called what they espoused Christianity, it really was more different from Christianity than Islam or Judaism are and was really more a Syncretic religion with more than a dash of crazy thrown in.

[WhatIsAUserName]

Originally Posted by LSCatilina

What about the carving on Kong When, that are dated from the first century, ca. 70?

By who? The only source I could find is an English teacher in China, with no sources cited and seemingly completely independent research. Now, that doesn't mean he's lying, but I would expect something more reliable than that.

[LSCatilina]

Originally Posted by WhatIsAUserName

By who? The only source I could find is an English teacher in China, with no sources cited and seemingly completely independent research. Now, that doesn't mean he's lying, but I would expect something more reliable than that.

Well, one of the main searcher is Pierre Perrier, who base himself on oral tradition and interpretation of said sculptures.

His method can be criticised, but he's nevertheless considered as one of the experts on oral transmission about Early Christianity (while NOT being historian of formation).
The fact he use this traces to support the idea of an historicity of St Thomas trails as said in oral tradition, or the existence of a chinese church, In my opinion is lowering the analysis he propose.

The main problem was the site was damaged during the study, by a karcher cleaning. Furthermore, it's possible that a later buddhist use used early christian symbolism to strength its own. It's still a recent discovery, and we'll have to wait to have a clear analysis.

I don't have the capacity to criticise deeply, or to support, Perrier analysis.
But the case is considered enough serious to have been mentioned by serious and scientific archeological publication.

I wanted to mention the possibility of an earlier appearance of Christianism in East, thanks to the Jews present along the Silk Way and that was, so long, not really considered by the historical study.

Currently, the department of popular religion of Nanjing are studying it. Hopefully, we would have more answer soon.

My point here, again, is to say that the presence of christianism in China can be more early than we tought 5 years ago, and for this thread propose another POD.

[Clandango]

Originally Posted by LSCatilina

What about the carving on Kong When, that are dated from the first century, ca. 70?

It would apparently revolves around the predication made to a chinese governor, up to a mention of the emperor.

It seems like it would be fairly easy for somone to carve a cross or two into the mountain side over the span of two thousand years. I would think that the early Christian missionaries would have better things to do.

[LSCatilina]

Originally Posted by Clandango

It seems like it would be fairly easy for somone to carve a cross or two into the mountain side over the span of two thousand years. I would think that the early Christian missionaries would have better things to do.

1) Yes, early churches tended to let a trace of their passage. Because it wasn't only about chatting, but aslo marking the sacred.
Putting a cross somewhere was often the first thing missionaries do for marking the territory. I don't see why marking the scenery of preaching would have been different.

2) There's a lot of critics that have be done, legitimally. But no one had yet said the carving were of later add compared to the rest of carving.

It's not just one random cross, but a whole scenery with many characters, one guy dressed like a jewish priest, one woman with a baby, a sign that chan be a chrism or an hebrew letter, and many characters. They're part of a same coherent ensemble.

3)The datation of the site vary but for now is put around the late Ist century. Not randomly, but looking at the style of sculpture, the chinese sources that could be fitting and even the style of dressing of characters.

Can I suggest you to put an eye to the temporary conclusions and critics (that can be harsh to Perrier, and for good reasons), instead of relying on a pre-made opinion?

[Clandango]

I could not find anything on Kong When. All I had to go by was the claim that those carvings were made within a few decades of the death of Jesus and that there was somehow already the worship of him as a child and the establishment of special clothing for priests, which he was lukewarm to at best, according to the Gospel. What is this you are talking about me having pre-made opinions for in thinking that Christian missionaries would be more focused on their flocks rather than landscaping?