The New Model of U.S. Religious Infiltration into China and Its Ideological Evolution

After the end of the Cold War, a newly rising theopolitical ideology combined with old geopolitical thinking to form a “new Cold War ideology” within the United States. U.S. religious infiltration into China has given rise to a new model that aligns with this “new Cold War ideology,” and the fundamental demand of this model is precisely the “new religious extraterritoriality” marked by the International Religious Freedom Act.

冷战结束以后，新崛起的神权政治意识形态与旧的地缘政治思想结合，在美国国内形成“新冷战意识形态”。美国对华宗教渗透出现与“新冷战意识形态”相适应的新模式，这种模式的根本诉求正是以《国际宗教自由法》为标志的“新宗教治外法权”。

I. The New Model of U.S. Religious Infiltration into China

一、美国对华宗教渗透新模式

The term “infiltration” sometimes carries connotations of “stealth” or “by-the-way.” Viewed in this light, using “infiltration” to describe the current U.S. religious strategy toward China seems somewhat inaccurate, because words like “aggressive,” “condescending,” and “sanctions” better highlight U.S. hard power, and American scholars are more inclined to describe it as a “struggle for the soul of the new world order.” However, if we regard the U.S. “new human rights strategy” as a “soft application of hard power” and understand “infiltration” as “combining hard and soft tactics,” then U.S. religious infiltration into China is not entirely an outdated expression.

“渗透”一词有时会给人“遮遮掩掩”、“捎带”的印象。如此来看，用“渗透”形容当前美国的对华宗教策略似乎有些不够准确，因为“强势”、“居高临下”、“制裁”等词更能彰显美国的硬实力，美国学者也更愿意将其描述为“争夺新世界秩序灵魂的斗争”。不过，如果把美国的“新人权战略”视为“硬实力的软运用”，把“渗透”一词理解为“软硬兼施”，那么，美国对华宗教渗透也不是一个完全过时的说法。

(A) New Objectives

（一）新目标

In modern times, relying on gunboat policy, foreign missionaries obtained “religious extraterritoriality” in China and played a highly dishonorable role in seizing interests in China. In 1943, the “old religious extraterritoriality” that existed in China in the form of unequal treaties was abolished. However, with the end of the Cold War, “new religious extraterritoriality” revived in the form of U.S. domestic law, becoming an “institutional” objective of U.S. religious diplomacy. The post-Cold War Clinton administration identified enhancing U.S. security, developing the U.S. economy, and promoting democracy abroad as the three major objectives of national security. Correspondingly, the U.S. government and scholars made substantive revisions to the definition of human rights, with the view that “human rights fall within the scope of sovereignty” gradually giving way to the claim that “human rights override sovereignty.” On the issue of human rights, the question of “religious freedom” was elevated to the status of the “first freedom,” advocating the “religious freedom promotes peace” theory, arguing that “religious freedom” is not only a human rights issue but also a “defining factor of U.S. national security,” and that “religious freedom promotes national security.” In 1998, the United States passed the International Religious Freedom Act. As Clinton stated upon signing the act: “My administration has made religious freedom a core element of American foreign policy.” The core and crux of the International Religious Freedom Act is precisely the U.S. government’s attempt to obtain “new extraterritoriality” in international religious affairs.

在近代，凭借炮舰政策，外国传教士获取了在华“宗教治外法权”，并在摄取在华利益方面扮演了极不光彩的角色。1943年，以不平等条约形式在中国存在的“旧宗教治外法权”被废止。但是，随着冷战的结束，“新宗教治外法权”以美国国内法的形式死灰复燃，成为美国宗教外交的“机制性”目标。冷战后上台的克林顿政府把提高美国安全、发展美国经济与在国外促进民主作为国家安全的三大目标。与此相适应，美国政府及学者对人权的定义作了实质性的修改，“人权属于主权范围内的事务”的观点逐渐让位于“人权高于主权”的主张。在人权问题上，又将“宗教自由”问题提升到“第一自由”的高度，鼓吹“宗教自由和平论”，认为“宗教自由”问题不仅是人权问题，而且是美国“国家安全的界定因素”，“宗教自由促进国家安全”。1998年，美国通过了《国际宗教自由法》，该法案的签署正如克林顿所说：“我的政府已经把宗教自由作为美国外交政策的一个核心因素。”而《国际宗教自由法》的核心和症结正是美国政府企图获得国际宗教事务中的“新治外法权”。

History is always strikingly similar. The critique by American historian Kenneth Scott Latourette of the “religious extraterritoriality” in the modern Sino-American Treaty of Tientsin [1]1 The Sino-American Treaty of Tientsin (1858) was one of the unequal treaties imposed on China after the Second Opium War; its "toleration clause" granted Christian missionaries and converts extraterritorial protection, effectively placing them beyond Chinese law. applies equally to the International Religious Freedom Act. Latourette pointed out: “The treaty (the Sino-American Treaty of Tientsin) inevitably removed Chinese believers from the jurisdiction of the Chinese government and made church groups into ‘states within a state’ scattered across the country under foreign protection… Almost any lawsuit could be claimed as persecution of believers by non-believers. And a foreign consul or minister, if he so wished, could always find a pretext for intervention. Many Chinese, seeing the advantage of a powerful foreign backer, pretended to repent and joined the church. There were also many missionaries who used the protection of foreign governments as bait to lure Chinese into the church… Therefore, the effect of the ‘toleration clause’ was not very glorious for the name of Christ… The church had long since become a partner of Western imperialism and could not shirk responsibility for the consequences that ensued.” (Kenneth Scott Latourette, A History of Christian Mission in China, N.Y.: Macmillan, 1929, p. 279)

历史总是惊人相似，美国史学家赖德烈针对近代《中美天津条约》中的“宗教治外法权”的批判同样适用于《国际宗教自由法》。赖德烈指出：“条约（《中美天津条约》）势必使中国信徒脱离中国政府的管辖，而使教会团体成为一些分布在全国各地而受着外国保护的‘国中之国’……差不多任何诉讼案子，都可以说成是由于非信徒逼迫信徒的。而外国领事或公使，只要他愿意的话，总可以找到干涉的借口。许多中国人，因为看见强大的外国靠山的好处，就假装悔改而加入教会。也有不少传教士，用外国政府的保护为饵，引诱中国人入教……因此，‘宽容条款’的效果，对基督的名并不是很光彩的……教会早已成为西方帝国主义的伙伴，对于因此而产生的后果是不能推卸责任的。”（KennethScott Latourette，A History of Christian Mission in China，N.Y.：Macmillan，1929.279）

American economist and geopolitical analyst William Engdahl frankly pointed out: “The United States employs little-known weapons, using ‘human rights’ and ‘democracy’ as weapons for a 21st-century version of the Opium War, forcing China to open up and accept U.S. superpower domination.” (William Engdahl, Behind the Hegemony, translated by Lü Dehong et al., Intellectual Property Publishing House, 2009, p. 55) Forming a “state within a state” within China based on “new religious extraterritoriality” is the latest objective of U.S. religious infiltration into China, and promoting a “new human rights movement” with no regard for any norms of international relations or ethical bottom lines will be a prominent marker of achieving this objective.

美国经济学家、地缘政治学家威廉•恩道尔坦率地指出：“美国采取的是鲜为人知的武器，利用‘人权’、‘民主’作为21世纪版的鸦片战争的武器，迫使中国敞开自己，接受美国的超级大国统治。”（威廉•恩道尔：《霸权背后》，吕德宏等译，知识产权出版社2009年版，第55页）在中国国内形成奠基于“新宗教治外法权”基础上的“国中之国”是美国对华宗教渗透的最新目标，推动没有任何国际关系准则和伦理底线的“新人权运动”将是实现该目标的突出标志。

(B) New Tactics

（二）新策略

Since reform and opening up, all major religions in China have developed healthily and orderly in the process of adapting to socialist society. Some scholars from religious circles at home and abroad have keenly observed that the “martyrdom” aura that once shrouded some religious groups has gradually faded, while the secular temptations under market economy conditions have become a common challenge facing all religions in China. At the same time, many U.S. missionary organizations have found that, entering the new century, Christianity in China seems to have lost the “rapid advance” momentum it had since the 1980s. In particular, the revival of traditional Chinese culture has meant that “Christianity is ‘only able to parry but not strike back’ against this surging tide, and even many Christian scholars have lost their principles, compromising and retreating. Not only have they failed to transform heterogeneous cultures with Christianity, but they have instead been transformed by them. For a time, there has been a great trend toward ‘Confucianization of Christianity’ and ‘Daoization of Christianity.’”

改革开放以来，我国各大宗教在与社会主义社会相适应的过程中都得到了健康、有序的发展。部分海内外宗教界的学者敏锐地观察到，曾经笼罩在一些宗教群体头上的“殉道”光环逐渐退却，而市场经济条件下的世俗诱惑成为中国各宗教必须面对的共同挑战。与此同时，许多美国宣教机构发现，进入新世纪后，基督宗教在中国似乎失去了20世纪80年代以来“高歌猛进”的发展势头，尤其是中国传统文化的复兴，使“基督教对此狂潮‘只有招架之功而无还手之力’，甚至很多基督徒学者丧失原则、调和退让，不仅没有用基督教转化异质文化，反而被对方转化，一时之间大有‘基督教儒家化’、‘基督教道家化’之势头”。

Against this backdrop, the U.S. International Religious Freedom Act has undoubtedly injected a shot in the arm for many missionary organizations. On the basis of fully grasping the basic spirit of this act, “politicization of religion” has become a priority tactic for some U.S. missionary organizations targeting China. The “advantages” of this new tactic are mainly manifested in the following aspects: First, the International Religious Freedom Act provides specific political, legal, and administrative safeguard mechanisms for “politicization of religion,” while “politicization of religion in China” in turn provides an “ideal” and realistic objective for the International Religious Freedom Act, preventing it from shooting without a target. Second, the missionary tactic centered on “Christianizing political culture” can enable China’s house churches [2]2 "House churches" (家庭教会) refer to Christian congregations in China that operate outside the state-sanctioned Three-Self Patriotic Movement and China Christian Council; they are not illegal per se but lack legal registration and are subject to varying degrees of official restriction. to reoccupy the “moral high ground,” thereby enhancing the appeal and cohesion of missionary work. Third, at the beginning of the 21st century, while developing rapidly, China entered a period of difficult reform and a period of prominent social contradictions. Objectively existing social problems and contradictions among the people also provide favorable conditions for “politicization of religion.”

在此背景下，美国《国际宗教自由法》无疑给许多宣教机构注入了一剂强心针，在充分领会该法案基本精神的基础上，“宗教政治化”成为一些美国对华宣教机构的优先策略。这一新策略的“优势”主要表现在以下几个方面：首先，《国际宗教自由法》为“宗教政治化”提供了具体的政治、法律和行政保障机制，而“中国宗教政治化”又为《国际宗教自由法》提供了“理想”和现实目标，使《国际宗教自由法》不至于无的放矢。其次，“以政治文化基督化为核心”的宣教策略可以使中国的家庭教会重新占领“道德制高点”，以此来增强宣教的吸引力和凝聚力。第三，21世纪初，中国在迅速发展的同时，进入改革攻坚期和社会矛盾凸显期。客观存在的社会问题和人民内部矛盾也为“宗教政治化”提供了有利条件。

The Christian rights defense movement or “rights defense politics” is the main pathway for realizing China’s “politicization of religion” tactic. Based on an “objective assessment” of the development and strength of house churches within China, some U.S. missionary organizations have proposed that house churches should abandon their past tactic of “hiding and enduring” and instead combine with “citizen rights defense,” adopting more proactive and sustained actions to “fight for rights.” Some radicals have further proposed a specific “movement-style rights defense” model: methodologically, it emphasizes discovering events, guiding events, elevating events, expanding events, summarizing events, and promoting events; in terms of action mechanisms, it stresses the synergy of the internet and media, grassroots action, lawyer rights defense, private fundraising, and the combined forces of churches and intellectual systems, thereby rapidly making individual rights defense incidents movement-based, large-scale, internationalized, and politicized. The new Christian rights defense politics is defined as “a new model that emerged in the 2000s, following the square politics of the 1980s and the underground politics of the 1990s. Its basic features include interactive network politics, the politics of love and justice, judicial-centered politics, politics adhering to the liberal tradition, and politics of constitutional defense and constitution-making, etc.”

基督徒维权运动或“维权政治”是中国“宗教政治化”策略的主要实现途径。部分美国宣教机构基于对中国国内家庭教会发展及力量的“客观判断”，提出家庭教会应该抛弃过去“躲、忍”的策略，转而与“公民维权”相结合，采取更加主动的持续行为去“争权”。一些激进分子则进一步提出具体的“运动式维权”模式：在方法论上注重发现事件、引导事件、升华事件、扩大事件、总结事件、推广事件；在行动机制上强调互联网与媒体联动、草根行动、律师维权、民间筹款、教会与知识系统等形成合力，从而迅速使个体的维权事件运动化、规模化、国际化和政治化。新的基督徒维权政治被界定为“是继20世纪80年代的广场政治，和90年代的地下政治，在2000年代崛起的新模式，其基本特征包括互动网络政治、爱与正义的政治、司法中心的政治、秉承自由传统的政治、护宪和立宪的政治等”。

Fundamentally, under the dominance of the U.S. “new human rights strategy,” “politicization of religion” aims to make religion “an important part of the anti-government movement” and a “leading force” in the host country. (Huntington, The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century, translated by Liu Junning, Shanghai Joint Publishing Press, 1998, p. 85)

从根本上讲，在美国“新人权战略”主导下的“宗教政治化”，就是要使宗教成为所在国“代表反政府运动的一个重要部分”和“主导力量”。（亨廷顿：《第三波——20世纪后期民主化浪潮》，刘军宁译，上海三联书店1998年版，第85页）

(C) New Carriers

（三）新载体

Since reform and opening up, overseas Chinese missionaries with backgrounds in Hong Kong and Taiwan have been the earliest and most numerous foreign evangelizing groups to enter mainland China. After the 1990s, the trend shifted to missionaries from mainland China bringing the gospel back to the mainland, and the rapidly increasing number of intellectuals from mainland China have been expected to, and have become, the new missionary carriers of this trend.

改革开放以来，具有港台背景的海外华人传教士是进入中国内地时间最早、数量最多的外来宣教群体。20世纪90年代以后，来自中国内地的传教士将福音传回中国内地成为主流趋势，而数量迅速增加的来自中国大陆的知识分子群体被期望并已经成为这一趋势的新的传教载体。

At the same time, “bringing the gospel to China’s future leaders” and “winning the Chinese intellectuals of this generation for Christ” became the primary goals of US missionary organizations targeting China. According to a survey in 2000, “as of August 2000, there were at least 216 fellowships and churches in the United States primarily composed of Chinese scholars; if English-language Bible study groups formed by Western churches and believers are included, the total number is certainly over 300.” “Among the more than 2 million Chinese in the United States, at least 300,000 are Chinese scholars with college degrees or higher; the proportion who have believed in the Lord is about 10%. The number of seminary-trained theology students and preachers exceeds 500.” (Su Wenfeng, *Overseas Chinese Scholar Ministry*, Overseas Campus Magazine Press, 2001, p. 16)

与此同时，“将福音传给中国未来的领导者” ，“为基督赢得这世代的华人知识分子”成为美国对华宣教机构的首要目标。据2000年一份调查统计，“至2000年8月止，美国至少有216个以上以中国学人为主体的团契和教会；若加上西人教会和信徒所组成的英语查经班，总数肯定在300个以上”。“全美国200多万华人中，具有大专以上学历的中国学人至少30万人以上；已信主的比例约10%。已受过神学院训练的神学生和传道人超过500人以上”。（苏文峰：《海外中国学人事工》，海外校园杂志社2001年版，第16页）

Entering the new century, the ministry to Chinese intellectuals in the United States has developed more rapidly on its original foundation. Taking the well-known missionary organization targeting China, “China Outreach Ministries” (COM), as an example: in 1988, as thousands of mainland Chinese graduate students and scholars gathered on campuses in the United States and Canada, the organization began shifting its core ministry to campus evangelism in North America. According to the organization’s 2008 annual ministry statistics: “46 staff members served Chinese student fellowships at 41 universities; on these 41 university campuses, there were over 24,000 mainland Chinese international students and visiting scholars; the gospel was preached to over 6,100 Chinese scholars; 2,150 scholars received concrete assistance from China Outreach Ministries; 320 scholars participated in gospel training; 817 scholars received gospel guidance and discipleship training; 71 Chinese Christian scholars returned to China.”

进入新世纪以来，美国华人知识分子事工在原有基础上得到更快发展。以知名对华宣教机构“友爱中华协会”（COM）为例，1988年，随着数以千计的中国大陆研究生和学者聚集在美国和加拿大的校园，该机构开始将其事工核心转换为北美校园布道。根据该机构2008年的年度事工统计：“有46名工作人员在41所大学服务于中国学生团契；在这41所大学校园里有超过24000名中国大陆留学生和访问学者；向超过6100名中国学人宣讲过基督的福音；有2150名学人得到友爱中华的具体帮助；有320名学人参加福音培训；有817名学人得到福音指导和门徒培训；有71名中国学人基督徒回到中国。”

Mainstream US media keenly noticed this phenomenon and gave it high praise. “I believe that bringing the gospel to students who have come to the United States from the People’s Republic of China is the most strategically significant Christian evangelistic mission in the world.” (Dr. David Aikman, senior journalist for *Time* magazine and China expert)

美国主流媒体敏感地注意到这一现象并予以高度评价。“我认为将福音传给从中华人民共和国来到美国的学生是这个世界上战略意义最重大的基督教福音使命。” （大卫•爱卡门博士，《时代》杂志资深记者、中国通）

With the emergence of the “wave of returnees,” the “returnee gospel ministry,” with Chinese intellectuals who studied in the United States as its important carriers, arose, and Chinese house churches also began to experience a “strategic turning point”: first, a shift from focusing on rural evangelism to focusing on urban ministry; second, an attention to political and legal issues, viewing the world as a monastery through the theological concepts of Puritanism, glorifying God in one’s occupation; third, Reformed theology becoming the mainstream denominational confession of the younger generation of preachers; fourth, the gradual rise of the younger generation of preachers; fifth, the accelerated integration of house churches and their entry into the public sphere. The rise of “online evangelism” has made it possible for overseas “online Christians” to “virtually return home” to preach, and BBS forums at Chinese domestic universities have become “a great harvest field for the gospel.” These new changes in personnel and technological carriers will greatly transform the model of international missionary work, and the traditional theory of “anti-religious infiltration” will also face a fundamental paradigm shift.

随着“海归潮”出现，以留美中国知识分子为重要载体的“海归福音事工”兴起，中国家庭教会也开始出现“战略转折”： 第一，从以乡村宣教为中心向以城市事工为中心转变；第二，关注政治法律问题，以清教徒的神学观念把世界看作修道院，在职业中荣耀上帝；第三，改革宗神学是年轻一代传道人的主流宗派认信；第四，年轻一代传道人逐渐崛起；第五，家庭教会加速整合并进入公共领域。而“网络福音”的兴起，使海外“网上基督徒”“虚拟回国”传教成为可能，中国国内高校的BBS成为“福音的大好禾场”。 这些人员和技术载体的新变化将会极大地改变国际性传教模式，传统的“反宗教渗透”理论也将面临根本的范式转换。

(4) New Organizational System

（四）新组织体系

The *International Religious Freedom Act of 1998*, as a domestic law of the United States, has inherent deficiencies in the application and enforcement of the law. Under the leadership of the US Congress and government, some religious or secular non-governmental organizations focused on human rights and religious issues have actively filled the gap, acting internationally as informal enforcers of this law and forming a certain international system of religious human rights or an international “human rights complex.” Against this backdrop, a new organizational system for religious infiltration into China emerged.

《1998年国际宗教自由法》作为美国的国内法，在法律的适用和执行上具有先天的不足。在美国国会和政府主导下，一些以人权和宗教为议题的宗教或世俗非政府组织主动填补空缺，在国际上积极充当该法案的非正式执行者，并形成某种宗教人权国际制度或国际“人权联合体（human rights complex）”。在此大背景下，新的对华宗教渗透组织体系应运而生。

In 2002, the “China Aid Association” was established in Texas, USA. “China Aid Association is a non-profit Christian organization dedicated to exploring, telling, and defending the truth concerning religious freedom issues in China, with a focus on the fate of unofficial churches.” (See the inaugural issue of the organization’s journal, *China Law and Religion Watch*). The main difference between this organization and traditional religious organizations is that its fundamental goal is not evangelism, but a focus on specially defined “religious freedom.” The organization runs a series of websites targeting China, among which the “China Religious Freedom Watch” website lists three main missions: first, the mission of China Religious Freedom Watch is to promote and advance religious freedom for all Chinese people. Second, to promptly publish news and reports concerning violations of Chinese citizens’ religious freedom. Third, to promote China as a sky without fences in matters of faith. From its inception, the organization has positioned itself as a “quasi-civil enforcement agency” of the US *International Religious Freedom Act* in China, and primarily carries out activities in the following areas: first, it plans, promotes, and directly participates in “religious incidents” within China, using these so-called “religious incidents” as material to pressure China through the United States and other international institutions. We can see the organization’s active presence in the vast majority of domestic incidents related to religion. Second, it systematically fabricates and promotes the “theory of religious persecution in China” both within the United States and internationally. The organization closely coordinates with the implementation of the US *International Religious Freedom Act*, submitting so-called “annual reports on religious persecution in China” to the US Congress and State Department each year. Third, it obstructs the normal international exchange activities of Chinese religious organizations. The organization heavily criticizes friendly exchange activities between overseas religious institutions and related individuals and China’s legal religious organizations, arguing that these exchanges “send misleading and discouraging signals to believers worldwide,” thereby neglecting “religion not controlled by the government.”

2002年，“对华援助协会”在美国德克萨斯州成立，“对华援助协会系非盈利基督教机构，旨在探索、讲述、捍卫涉及中国宗教自由问题的真理，并专注于非官方教会的命运”。（参见该机构会刊《中国法律与宗教观察》发刊词）该机构与传统宗教组织的主要区别在于：其组织的根本目标不是传教，而是专注于经过特殊界定的“宗教自由”。该机构主办了系列对华网站，其中的“中国宗教自由观察网”罗列了三个方面的主要使命：第一，中国宗教自由观察网的使命是促进推动所有中国人的宗教自由。第二，将有关践踏中国公民宗教自由的消息和报道传递及时发表。第三，推动中国成为信仰上没有栅栏的天空。该机构自成立伊始，就以美国《国际宗教自由法案》在中国的“准民间执行机构”自居，并主要在以下几个方面开展活动：首先，策划、推动并直接参与中国国内的“宗教事件”，并以这些所谓的“宗教事件”为素材推动美国和其他国际机构对中国施压。我们可以在国内绝大多数与宗教相关的群体事件中看到该机构活跃的身影。第二，在美国国内和国际上系统炮制和宣扬“中国宗教迫害论”。该机构密切配合美国《国际宗教自由法案》的实施，每年向美国国会和国务院提交所谓的“中国宗教迫害年度报告”。第三，阻碍中国宗教组织正常开展的对外交流活动。该机构对海外宗教机构和相关人士与中国合法宗教组织开展的友好交往活动大肆批评，认为这些交往活动会“向全世界的信仰者发出误导和令人气馁的信号”，从而忽略了“不受政府控制的宗教”。

In order to establish a “state within a state” not controlled by the Chinese government, organizations represented by the US “China Aid Association” have done extensive work in ideology and organizational construction. “Church nationalization” has become an explicit goal for many missionary organizations; therefore, establishing a nationwide church leadership body within China not controlled by the government has become an urgent task. In 2007, under the direct manipulation

为了建立“不受中国政府控制”的“国中之国”，以美国“对华援助协会”为代表的相关机构在意识形态和组织建构方面做了大量工作。“教会国度化”成为许多宣教机构的明确目标，因此，在中国国内建立全国性的不受中国政府控制的教会领导机构成为当务之急。2007年 ，在“美国对华援助协会”的直接操控下，“中国家庭教会联合会” 被拼凑出来。该组织组建各省分会，指定分会会长，开展全国性的施工拓展。在各种势力操纵下，该组织很快沦为以“施工拓展为招牌的敛财工具”。2008年11月，该非法组织被中国民政部依法取缔。

To adapt to the new human rights strategy led by the United States, the newly constructed organizations for religious infiltration into China exhibit distinct characteristics of "de-religionization" and "politicization." Internationally, with the U.S. government, Congress, and relevant religious institutions as the leading forces, and with the "China Aid Association" as the organizational core, a pressure group targeting "China's religious issues" has been formed. Domestically in China, the "China Aid Association" on the one hand covets the leadership of China's house churches, attempting to establish a nationwide religious leadership body that "integrates urban and rural areas," thereby completing a "nationalization of the church" under its control; on the other hand, it seeks to rely on house churches to transcend the religious sphere, "cleverly editing various elements of freedom in Chinese society," to form a political organization system for rights protection that includes "forces such as the internet, the political-legal system, house churches, and the media."

为适应美国主导的新人权战略，新建构的对华宗教渗透组织具有明显的“非宗教化”和“政治化”特点。在国际上，以美国政府、国会和相关宗教机构为主导者，以“对华援助协会”为组织核心，形成针对“中国宗教问题”的压力集团。在中国国内，“对华援助协会”一方面觊觎中国家庭教会的领导权，尝试建立“整合城乡”的全国性宗教领导机构，完成在其掌控下的“教会国度化”；另一方面，企图以家庭教会为依托，超越宗教领域，“巧妙编辑中国社会的各种自由元素”，形成包括“互联网、政法系、家庭教会、媒体等力量”的维权政治组织体系。

II. The Ideological Evolution of U.S. Religious Infiltration into China

二、美国对华宗教渗透的意识形态演变

As Marx stated: “The so-called Christian state, which adopts a political approach to religion and a religious approach to politics.” (Marx, “On the Jewish Question,” *Complete Works of Marx and Engels*, Vol. 1, People’s Publishing House, 1965, p. 432) After the end of the Cold War, U.S. religious right-wing forces ushered in a “golden age” through “political resurgence,” a phenomenon some scholars have described as an American-style “theocracy” of religious restoration. The United States has developed a new Cold War mentality based on the ideology of a “new theocracy” and old geopolitical objectives. This ideological evolution has not only altered the domestic political climate in the United States but has also had profound impacts on international politics, military affairs, and diplomacy.

正如马克思所说：“所谓基督教国家，它从政治的角度对待宗教，又从宗教的角度对待政治。”（马克思：《论犹太人问题》，《马克思恩格斯全集》第1卷，人民出版社1965年版，第432页）冷战结束以后，美国宗教右翼势力以“政治崛起”的方式迎来了一个“美好时代”，一些学者将这种现象描述为宗教势力复辟的美国式“神权政治”。美国出现了建立在“新神权政治”意识形态与旧地缘政治目标基础上的新冷战思维，这种意识形态的演变不仅改变了美国国内政治气候，而且在国际政治、军事和外交上产生深刻影响。

(I) Theocratic Ideology

（一）神权政治意识形态

In 1998, President Clinton signed the *International Religious Freedom Act*, marking the formal establishment of a U.S.-led “new human rights strategy” centered on “international religious freedom.” George W. Bush, who took office in 2000 as a “man of their own in the White House” for U.S. religious right-wing forces, provided his supporters with “faith-based warfare, faith-based law enforcement, faith-based education, faith-based healthcare, and faith-based science.” (Kenneth D. Wald and Allison Calhoun-Brown, *Religion and Politics in the United States*, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2010, p. 225) As the White House and Congress vied to curry favor with influential evangelical activists, the U.S. church-state relationship became severely imbalanced. Christian right-wing supporters “had their hands on the policy process” (ibid., p. 225), to the extent that American evangelical right-wing preacher Jerry Falwell directly declared, “The idea of separation of church and state was invented by the devil.” This trend toward political theocracy alarmed some segments of the American public. In the 2008 U.S. presidential election, Obama’s pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, forcefully expressed his critique with the slogan “God damn America,” a direct counter to George W. Bush. In Wright’s view, the theocratic ideology of the United States led it to kill innocent people abroad and treat its own people inhumanely at home. The crux of this ideology, he argued, lay in “America’s consistent action of seeing itself as God and claiming supremacy.” (ibid., p. 277)

1998年克林顿签署《国际宗教自由法》标志着美国主导的以“国际宗教自由”为核心的“新人权战略”正式形成。2000年上台的小布什作为美国宗教右翼势力“在白宫中的自己人”，为其支持者提供了“基于信仰的战争，基于信仰的执法，基于信仰的教育，基于信仰的医疗，和基于信仰的科学”。（Kenneth D. Wald and Allison Calhoun-Brown：Religion and politics in the United States，Rowman & Littlefield Publishers，Inc，2010.225）由于白宫和国会争相取悦影响广泛的福音派活动家，美国政教关系出现严重失衡，基督教右翼支持者“操纵了美国的政治进程（Christian Right had their hands on the policy process）”，（同上，第225页）以至于美国福音派右翼布道家杰瑞•法威尔直接宣告“宗教与政治分离的观念是魔鬼发明的”。这种政治神权化的趋势引起了部分美国民众的警觉，在2008年美国总统大选中，奥巴马的牧师Rev. Jeremiah Wright以“上帝诅咒美国”这种与小布什针锋相对的口号强力表达了自己的反思。在Wright看来，美国的神权政治意识形态导致了美国在国际上滥杀无辜，在国内非人道地对待其人民，而这种意识形态的症结就在于“美国一贯在行动中把自己视为上帝和自诩为至高无上者”。（同上，第277页）

The greatest paradox of U.S. theocracy lies in the conflict between the religious universalism it preaches and the doctrine of American interests first. Where and when religious universalism aligns with U.S. interests, the United States firmly supports it; where and when it diverges, the United States sacrifices universalism and becomes a staunch advocate of American interests first. In the history of Sino-U.S. relations, the double standards of U.S. theocracy have been fully displayed. In the latter half of the 19th century, the United States achieved “equal opportunity” in China through the “Open Door” policy and obtained religious privileges in China through the *Toleration Clause*. [3]3 Samuel Huntington (1927–2008) was an American political scientist whose “clash of civilizations” thesis argued that post-Cold War conflict would be primarily cultural and religious rather than ideological or economic. Ironically, in 1882, the United States passed the *Chinese Exclusion Act*, the only law targeting a specific ethnic group. The ideas expressed in this act were a strange mixture, with core ideologies derived from several contradictory sources: at the religious level, the Chinese were seen as dangerous heathens; at the level of national cultural psychology, it included the incitement of the “Yellow Peril” threat theory; and racism, incompatible with Christian creationism, drew from social Darwinism. U.S. racist ideology held that people of color were at a lower stage of the evolutionary ladder, with Anglo-Saxons at the top. Other lower races were either to follow Anglo-Saxon leadership or fall to the bottom of the racial hierarchy, facing ultimate extinction.

美国神权政治最大的悖论在于：其宣扬的宗教普世主义与美国利益至上论相冲突。在宗教普世主义与美国利益一致的时间和地点，美国坚定地支持宗教普世主义；在宗教普世主义与美国利益相背离的时间和地点，美国则牺牲普世主义，成为坚定的美国利益至上论者。在中美关系史上，美国神权政治的双重标准得到淋漓尽致的发挥。19世纪下半叶，美国通过“门户开放”政策得以对华“利益均沾”，通过《宽容条款》获得在中国的宗教特权。具有讽刺意味的是，1882年，美国国内却通过了唯一针对外民族的《排华法案》，该法案表达的观念是一个奇怪的混合物，其核心意识形态来自于相互矛盾的几个源头，宗教层面视华人为危险的异教徒，民族文化心理层面则包含“黄祸威胁论”的蛊惑，而种族主义却来源于与基督宗教创世论不相容的社会达尔文主义。美国的种族主义意识形态认为有色人种处于进化序列的低级阶段，盎格鲁•撒克逊人居于种族等级的顶端，其他低等级种族要么追随盎格鲁•撒克逊人的领导，要么跌入种族等级的底部，去面对其终极灭绝的命运。

(Michael H. Hunt, *Ideology and U.S. Foreign Policy*, Yale University Press, 2009, p. 79) Dominated by this deeply theocratic ideology, the Chinese were severely demonized: they were stubborn heathens, licentious, and morally corrupt. They gathered like rats in plague-ridden slums, and “Chinatowns” were considered a serious threat to the health, morality, and well-being of white communities. “Therefore, a two-pronged approach was necessary to deal with the Chinese: on the one hand, the religious rituals of Christian missionaries; on the other, the strict exclusion of the Chinese from the remote areas of civilization in Hawaii and the West Coast.” (ibid., p. 80)

（Michael H. Hunt: Ideology and U.S. Foreign Policy，Yale University Press，2009.79）在这种具有浓厚神权政治色彩的意识形态主导下，中国人被严重妖魔化，他们是顽固的异教徒，荒淫无耻，道德败坏。他们像老鼠一样聚集在瘟疫流行的贫民窟，“唐人街”被认为对白人社区的健康、道德和福祉构成严重威胁。“因此，对付中国人有必要采取两手，一方面是基督教传教士的宗教仪式，另一方面严格地将中国人从夏威夷和西海岸文明的偏远地区排除出去。”（同上，第80页）

Entering the late 20th century, mainstream American society engaged in a certain degree of reflection and revision regarding racism, one of the three basic ideologies of U.S. foreign policy. However, the deeper theocratic ideology embedded within racism has not only consistently lacked genuine self-awareness but has also intensified under the push of various political forces. Traditional religious discrimination and exclusionary ideologies have gradually evolved into the modern “clash of civilizations” theory, while the ancient “Yellow Peril” threat theory has transformed into the 21st-century “China threat theory.” Under the U.S.-led “new human rights strategy,” China has become the primary imagined enemy. It is not difficult to understand the profound ideological roots embedded in this.

进入20世纪后期，美国主流社会对美国外交的三大基本意识形态之一的种族主义有过一定程度的反省和修正。但是，对于蕴涵在种族主义中的更深层次的神权政治意识形态，不仅始终缺乏真正的自觉意识，而且在各种政治势力的推动下愈演愈烈。传统的宗教歧视与排他性意识形态逐渐演变成现代的“文明冲突论”，而古老的“黄祸威胁论”则演变成21世纪的“中国威胁论”。在美国主导下的“新人权战略”中，中国成为主要的假想敌，我们是不难理解其中蕴含的深刻意识形态根源的。

(II) Geopolitical Ideology

（二）地缘政治意识形态

In the late 19th century, the group of U.S. missionaries to China played a key role in shaping the image of China and the Chinese people among the American public. Some contemporary American scholars have pointed out: “Those eloquent and opinionated missionaries widely disseminated their impressions in the United States. The gospel pioneers reported to America that China was a ‘moral desert,’ its people ignorant

19世纪末期，在美国民众中塑造中国和中国人的形象方面，美国对华传教士群体扮演了关键的角色。美国当代一些学者指出：“那些能说会道、固执己见的传教士将他们的感想在美国广为传播。福音先驱们向美国报道的中国是一个‘道德荒漠’，它的人民愚昧、道德败坏和肮脏。”（同上，第70页）不过，传教士也敏感地发现中国在地缘政治上的重大意义。中国潜力巨大，亚洲将会改变，中国将是这种改变的支点。美国应该通过外交投资、经济贸易、基督教传教对中国施加更大影响。美国在对华关系方面交织着两种不同声音：其一，中国人是令人厌恶的生物，应该不惜一切代价与他们保持距离；其二，中国是美国人赋有特殊使命的“责任病区”，美国人有责任教导、保护他们，甚至包括对他们的不良行为进行惩罚。（同上，第71页）神权政治与地缘政治的相互影响，使美国的对华外交在起始阶段就具有了两面性，在美国传统的外交精英看来，《宽容条款》和《排华法案》并无矛盾之处。

After the end of the Cold War, U.S. geopolitical ideology reverted to cultural and religious traditions, with “culture and cultural identity forming the patterns of cohesion, disintegration, and conflict in the post-Cold War world.” Within the new “civilizational paradigm,” “the universalism of Western countries increasingly leads them into conflict with other civilizations, most seriously with Islam and China.” [3]3 Samuel Huntington (1927–2008) was an American political scientist whose “clash of civilizations” thesis argued that post-Cold War conflict would be primarily cultural and religious rather than ideological or economic. (Samuel Huntington, *The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order*, trans. Zhou Qi et al., Xinhua Publishing House, 2010, p. 4) In analyzing “the emerging alignment,” Huntington speculated about a so-called “Confucian-Islamic connection” opposed to the West, although he himself acknowledged that “Chinese enthusiasm has been quite low.” (Ibid., p. 215) To maintain the predominance of the U.S.-led West, the West “must skillfully use its economic resources as carrots and sticks in dealing with other societies, while promoting Western alliances, coordinating its policies, … and fostering and exploiting differences among non-Western countries.” (Ibid., p. 182)

冷战结束以后，美国的地缘政治意识形态向文化、宗教传统复归，“文化和文化认同形成了冷战后世界上的结合、分裂和冲突模式。”在新的“文明范式”中，“西方国家的普世主义日益把它引向同其他文明的冲突，最严重的是同伊斯兰和中国的冲突。”（塞缪尔•亨廷顿：《文明的冲突与世界秩序的重建》，周琪等译， 新华出版社2010年版，第4页）亨廷顿在分析“正在形成的联盟”时，臆测了一个所谓反对西方的“儒教和伊斯兰教国家联盟”，虽然他自己也承认“中国的热情一直相当低落”。（同上，第215页）为了保持以美国为首的西方优势地位，西方“必须在与其他社会打交道时巧妙地将其经济资源作为胡萝卜和大棒来应用，同时促进西方联盟，协调其政策，……并促进和利用非西方国家之间的差别。”（同上，第182页）

Geopolitically, “China is becoming the dominant power in East Asia,” and balancing and containing China, “the largest actor in human history,” through a balance of power conforms to Western hegemonic logic. According to the “clash of civilizations” paradigm, the United States, to obtain the most favorable geopolitical configuration for itself, exerts effort from two directions: encouraging and pressuring China to become a first-tier participant in “fault-line wars” against Islamic countries and other civilizations, while the United States itself plays the role of a third-party or third-tier participant and mediator. Consequently, the United States is keen to play religious geopolitical games in Xinjiang and Tibet: “The more unstable Xinjiang is, the more ‘ideal’ it becomes for them.” (William Engdahl, *Behind the Hegemony*, p. 103)

在地缘政治上，“中国正在成为东亚的支配国家”，通过均势来平衡和遏制中国这个“人类历史上最大角色”符合西方霸权逻辑。根据“文明冲突”范式，美国为获取对其最为有利的地缘政治格局，分别从两方面发力，鼓励和逼迫中国成为针对伊斯兰教国家和其他文明的“断层线战争”的第一层次参与者，而美国作为第三方或第三层次的参与者和调停者发挥作用。因此，美国热衷于在新疆、西藏玩弄宗教地缘政治游戏，“新疆越是不稳定，他们就越‘理想’”。（威廉•恩道尔：《霸权背后》，第103页）

In a sense, a “harmony of civilizations” paradigm would leave the United States “isolated overseas” and a “secondary participant” in the world, whereas under the U.S.-dominated “clash of civilizations” paradigm, both East Asia and Europe serve as natural “strategic buffer zones” for the United States. We can observe that U.S. religious diplomacy toward China after the Cold War is not entirely unrelated to its geopolitical objectives. U.S. missionary organizations targeting China have adjusted their missionary strategies, emphasizing “the evangelization of China” and “the gospel entering China” while placing “the gospel going out from China” in a prominent position. “Back to Jerusalem,” as a westward plan for “the gospel going out from China,” carries a strong geopolitical ideological coloring. This plan is not merely about “bringing the gospel to Jerusalem” but “bringing the gospel to every country, city, town, and ethnic minority between China and Jerusalem, and establishing fellowship with those believers.” (Yang Tianmin, *Back to Jerusalem: The Call to Fulfill the Great Commission*, Jixin Publishing House, 2005, p. 5) Sending at least 100,000 missionaries from China to Islamic, Hindu, and Buddhist countries is the core part of the plan. The reason the “Back to Jerusalem” plan is widely embraced in the United States is inseparable from the fact that its embedded geopolitical ideology aligns with U.S. global strategy.

在某种意义上，“文明和谐”范式会使美国“孤悬海外”，成为世界的“次要参与者”，而在美国强力主导的“文明冲突”范式下，东亚和欧洲都是美国天然的“战略缓冲带”。我们可以发现，美国冷战后的对华宗教外交与其地缘政治目标并不是完全没有关系。美国对华宣教机构调整宣教策略，在强调“中国福音化”、“福音入中国”的同时，将“福音出中国”摆在突出位置。“回归耶路撒冷”作为“福音出中国”的西向计划，具有强烈的地缘政治意识形态色彩，该计划并非只将“福音传到耶路撒冷”，而是“要把福音传到从中国到耶路撒冷之间的各个国家、城市、乡镇和少数民族中，并与那些信徒们建立团契”。（杨天民：《回归耶路撒冷——完成大使命的呼召》，基馨出版社2005年版，第5页）从中国至少差派100000名宣教士赴伊斯兰教国家、印度教国家、佛教国家传教是该计划的核心部分。“回归耶路撒冷”计划之所以在美国广受追捧，与其蕴涵的地缘政治意识形态契合美国的全球战略是分不开的。

(3) The New Cold War Ideology

（三）新冷战意识形态

During the Cold War, many prominent American missionaries became natural “Cold War preachers.” [4]4 Billy Graham (1918–2018) was a prominent American evangelical Christian preacher who served as a spiritual advisor to several U.S. presidents and was an outspoken anti-communist during the Cold War. (Tu Yichao, *American Christian Evangelicals and Their Influence on International Relations: A Study Centered on Billy Graham*, Shanghai People’s Publishing House, 2010, p. 194) They believed: “Western culture and its fruits are rooted in the Bible, the Word, and the great awakenings of the 17th and 18th centuries. Communism has resolved to defy God, the Bible, and all religion. Communism is not merely an economic interpretation of life… Communism is led, inspired, and driven by the devil, who declares war on Almighty God.” (William Martin, *A Prophet with Honor: The Billy Graham Story*, New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc., 1991, p. 197) To defeat communism, the tool of Satan, “today there is only one philosophical system in the world that can counter the conspiratorial scheming of communism, and that is a vibrant, dynamic orthodox Christianity… The greatest and most effective anti-communist weapon today is the born-again Christian.” (Bernard K. Duffy & Halford R. Ryan, *American Orators of the Twentieth Century: Critical Studies and Sources*, New York: Greenwood, 1987, p. 182) After the end of the Cold War, some cultural conservatives began discussing a so-called “Asia-America Cold War.” They argued that U.S.-China relations had become “increasingly confrontational,” and that the underlying causes of conflict between the two countries, besides “fundamental differences over the future balance of power in East Asia,” were “fundamental differences in society and culture.” (Samuel Huntington, *The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order*, p. 201) A new Cold War ideology, combining the “communist threat theory” and the “clash of civilizations theory,” took shape in the United States.

在冷战时期，许多美国著名传教士成为天然的“冷战布道者”，（涂怡超：《美国基督教福音派及其对国际关系的影响——以葛培理为中心的考察》，上海人民出版社2010年版，第194页）他们认为：“西方文化及其果实植根于《圣经》、圣言和17、18世纪的大奋兴。而共产主义已经决心违抗上帝、《圣经》和所有宗教。共产主义不仅是对生命的经济解释……共产主义是由向全能上帝宣战的魔鬼引领、激发和推动的。”（William Martin. A Prophet with Honor: The Billy Graham Story. New York：William Morrow and Company， Inc.，1991.197）为战胜作为撒旦工具的共产主义，“今日世界唯有一种哲学体系可与共产主义的阴谋策划相抗衡，这就是生机勃勃、动力十足的正统基督教……今日最伟大且有效的反共利器是再生的基督徒。”（Bernard K. Duffy & Halford R. Ryan，American Orators of the Twenties Century：Critical Studies and Source，New York：Greenwood，1987.182）冷战结束以后，一些文化保守主义者开始讨论所谓的“亚洲—美国冷战”，他们认为，美国与中国的关系变得“越来越具对抗性”，两国冲突的潜在原因，除了“两国在东亚未来均势问题上的根本分歧”外，“冲突的根源是社会和文化方面的根本差异”。（塞缪尔•亨廷顿：《文明的冲突与世界秩序的重建》，第201页）一种兼有“共产主义威胁论”和“文明冲突论”的新冷战意识形态在美国形成。

Influenced by the “new Cold War ideology,” some Chinese Christians in the United States circulate wishful “assumptions”: if China becomes a Christian nation, then Sino-American friendship would surpass U.S.-Japan relations, because Japan is a non-Christian country (Yuan Zhiming); if China cannot become a Christian nation, then the United States will forever regard China as an enemy (Yu Ge). A few extremists even advocate that “the rise of a non-Christian China is a scourge on the world” (Yu Jie). Therefore, “Chinese Christians should devote themselves to studying and planning a political system based on the Bible, concerning the basic values of the public interest.” They should “transform Chinese culture with Christian faith, and provide and lead the contribution of Christian faith in the cultural, intellectual, educational, political, and social spheres.” (Zhao Tian’en, *Help Me Move Forward*, Taipei: Zhongfu Publishing House, 1993, p. 184) “When a godless socialist state enacts laws banning religion or issues policies resisting the advance of God’s kingdom, Christians should protest to the government, helping the government not to resist the Lord who granted them authority.” “Christians’ attitude toward a godless government that persecutes the church must be directed against the anti-Christ spirit behind that government.” (Zhao Tian’en, *Foreseeing the Opportunity: A Commentary on the CCP’s Religious Policy and the Three-Self Patriotic Movement*, Taipei: Zhongfu Publishing House, 1993, p. 170) Not only should missionary work among urban universities, intellectuals, and overseas students be further expanded, but it is also necessary to launch a sustained, global movement “to preach the gospel to Communist Party members,” both inside and outside China.

受“新冷战意识形态”影响，在部分美国华人基督徒中流传着一些一厢情愿的“假设”：如果中国成为一个基督教国家，则中美友谊会超过日美关系，因为日本是非基督教国家（远志明）；而如果中国不能成为一个基督教国家，则美国会永远视中国为敌（于歌）。少数极端分子甚至鼓吹“非基督教中国的崛起是世界的祸害（余杰）”。因此，“中国基督徒应倾力学习并筹划一个建基于圣经基础，关于公众利益之基本价值的政治体系”。“以基督教的信仰改造中国文化，并且在文化界、思想界、教育界、政治界、社会里，提供基督教信仰的贡献，并领导之”。（赵天恩：《扶我前行》，台北：中福出版社1993年版，第184页）“当一个无神的社会主义国家颁布禁教的法律，或发表抗拒神国进行的政策时，基督徒应向政府抗议，帮助政府不要抵挡那赐给他们权柄的主”。“基督徒对一个逼迫教会的无神论政府的态度，必须针对政府背后的那股敌基督的邪灵”。（赵天恩：《洞烛先机——中共宗教政策及三自会评论》，台北：中福出版社1993年版，第170页）不仅要进一步拓展对城市高校、知识分子、海外留学人员的宣教事工，而且有必要发起一场“给共产党员传福音”的中国内外、全球性的持续运动。

Among Chinese Christian congregations in the United States, most Chinese Christians regard the Christian faith as a way of life and neither identify with nor care about the U.S.-led international religious freedom movement (the new human rights movement). To address the widespread lack of motivation for political participation within Chinese churches, certain missionary organizations have deliberately promoted the “Christianization of overseas democratic movements” as a “win-win” political engine. “Specializing in gospel ministry among democracy activists” and “fighting side by side with overseas democracy activists” have become key steps in the Christianization of Chinese politics. After more than 20 years of careful cultivation, many democracy activists “participate in various overseas democratic movements and campaigns for religious freedom under the name of Christian institutions” and “are playing a huge role within Christianity and in overseas democratic movements.” [5]5 The RAND Corporation is an American nonprofit global policy think tank, often associated with research on military strategy and psychological warfare. Meanwhile, house churches in China are expected not only to abandon the “martyrdom spirit” of “waiting to be beaten” but also to become the spiritual pillar and organizational force for China’s democratization. Chinese house churches must unite to “walk out of the history of the Party-state” and “walk out of the red ocean of communism.”

在美国华人教会中，大多数华人基督徒将基督宗教信仰视为一种生活方式，对美国主导的国际宗教自由运动（新人权运动）既不认同，也不关心。为了解决华人教会中普遍存在的政治参与的动力缺乏问题，在一些传教机构的刻意主导下，“海外民运基督化”成为一种“双赢”的政治发动机。“专门开展民运人士福音事工”，“与海外民运人士并肩作战”成为中国政治基督化的重要步骤。经过20多年的精心培育，许多民运分子“以基督徒机构名义参与各类海外民主运动、呼吁宗教自由活动”，“在基督教内和海外民主运动中正发挥着巨大的作用”。而中国国内的家庭教会，不仅应该抛弃“等着挨打”的“殉道精神”，而且要成为中国民主化的精神支柱和组织力量。中国家庭教会要联合起来“走出党国”的历史，“走出共产主义的红色海洋”。

The tree desires stillness but the wind will not cease; the ideology of the “new Cold War” has caused “the world to face a confluence of forces and events more dangerous than ever before,” yet “almost no one realizes how dangerous the madness driving Washington’s policy has become.” (William Engdahl, *Behind the Hegemony*, p. 319)

树欲静而风不止，“新冷战”意识形态使“世界面临从未有过的各种力量和事件如此危险的汇合”，但是，“几乎没有人意识到，驱动华盛顿政策的那种疯狂已经变得多么危险”。（威廉•恩道尔：《霸权背后》，第319页）

III. Political-Religious Harmony and the Chinese Model

三、政教和谐与中国模式

What is called religious infiltration is in essence a form of “political infiltration.” “What plays a decisive role in it is international monopoly capital or hostile foreign forces; overseas religion is merely a convenient ‘tool’ or ‘means’ used by international monopoly capital or hostile foreign forces to carry out their strategy of peaceful evolution.” [6]6 "Stones from another mountain" (他山之石) is a Chinese idiom from the *Book of Songs* (《诗经》), meaning advice or lessons that can be drawn from others' experiences. That is to say, the “ultimate subject” or “deep subject” of overseas religious infiltration is international monopoly capital or hostile foreign forces, while overseas religion is at most a “penultimate subject” or “surface subject.” (Duan Dezhi, *Religious Studies*, People’s Publishing House 2010, p. 444) The “restoration” of American theocratic politics and its manifestation in foreign policy are, to a large extent, an ideological reaction to the decline of its global hegemony. Therefore, in examining the issue of overseas religious infiltration, we must neither commit leftist errors nor rightist errors, but should “let religion return to its original religious nature.” (Zhou Enlai, “Four Conversations on the Christian Question” [May 1950], *Selected Works of Zhou Enlai on the United Front*, People’s Publishing House 1984, p. 181)

所谓宗教渗透，其实质是一种“政治渗透”。“在其中起决定性作用的则是国际垄断资本主义或境外敌对势力，境外宗教只不过是国际垄断资本主义或境外敌对势力推行其和平演变战略的一种方便的‘工具’或‘手段’而已”。也就是说，境外宗教渗透的“终极主体”或“深层主体”是国际垄断资本主义或境外敌对势力，而境外宗教充其量不过是一种“次终极主体”或“表层主体”。（段德智：《宗教学》，人民出版社2010年版，第444页）美国神权政治的“复辟”及其在外交上的表现很大程度上是其全球霸权颓势的意识形态反应。因此，我们在看待境外宗教渗透问题上，既不能犯左的错误，也不能犯右的错误，而应该“让宗教还它个宗教的本来面目”。（周恩来：《关于基督教问题的四次谈话》（1950年5月），《周恩来统一战线文选》，人民出版社1984年版，第181页）

First, we must eliminate all interference and uphold and improve a new type of political-religious relationship compatible with socialism with Chinese characteristics. “This new type of political-religious relationship is based on the principle of separation of church and state and takes political-religious harmony as its value orientation. That is to say, it adheres to the principle of separation of church and state, draws clear boundaries between politics and religion, prevents the substitution of politics for religion or religion for politics, and provides institutional guarantees for freedom of religious belief; but it does not take separation of church and state as the ultimate goal of handling political-religious relations. Instead, on the basis of separation, it strives for harmony in political-religious relations, forming a relationship of benign interaction.” (Wang Zuo’an, “On Contemporary Political-Religious Relations in China,” *Study Times*, November 23, 2009) History and reality have fully proven that any form of “theocratic politics” leads only to endless religious conflict, political-religious conflict, and “clash of civilizations.” Adhering to “mutual respect in belief and political unity and cooperation” is the essence of China’s contemporary new type of political-religious relationship.

首先，我们必须排除一切干扰，坚持和完善与中国特色社会主义相匹配的新型政教关系。“这种新型政教关系，以政教分离原则为基础，以政教和谐为价值取向。也就是说，坚持政教分离原则，在政教之间划分出清晰的界限，防止以政代教或者以教代政，为宗教信仰自由提供了制度保障；但并不把政教分离作为处理政教关系的终极目标，而是在政教分离基础上努力追求政教关系的和谐，形成良性互动的关系”。（王作安：《关于中国当代政教关系》，《学习时报》，2009年11月23日）历史和现实充分证明，任何形态的“神权政治”只会导致无止境的宗教冲突、政教冲突和“文明的冲突”。而坚持“信仰上互相尊重，政治上团结合作”，是我国当代新型政教关系的精髓。

Second, adhere to the principle of running churches independently and self-reliantly. The modern history of China and the world teaches people that “without independence, there is no diplomacy,” and religion is no exception. In the 1950s, patriotic figures in China’s Christian and Catholic circles proposed the principle of running churches independently and self-reliantly, a principle that received strong support from the Party and the government and was thus established. Article 36 of China’s Constitution stipulates: “Religious groups and religious affairs are not subject to the domination of foreign forces.” We must correct the absence and misplacement of legal awareness among some people regarding religion. No religion enjoys privileges beyond the laws and regulations of China (or any sovereign and integral state), and no law of any other country can become superior to the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China. China should no longer, and will not, allow a “state within

第二，坚持独立自主自办教会的原则。世界和中国近现代历史都启示人们，“无自立则无以外交”，宗教也不例外。20世纪50年代我国爱国基督教、天主教界人士提出独立自主自办教会的原则，这一原则得到党和政府大力的支持而确定下来。我国宪法第36条规定：“宗教团体和宗教事务不受外国势力的支配。”我们要纠正一些人在宗教方面存在的法制观念的缺位和错位，任何宗教都不享有可以超出我国（任何主权完整国家）法律、法规的特权，任何其他国家的法律都不可能成为中华人民共和国宪法的上位法。中国再也不应该和不会出现建立在“宗教治外法权”基础上的“国中之国”。

Third, establish a long-term crisis management mechanism for religious emergencies. In today's world, the "new human rights movement" led by the United States vigorously promotes the "politicization of religion" and the "movementization of politics" on a global scale. The combination of religious factors with the internet, mobile phones, and software platforms has become one of the ideal carriers of the "swarm tactics" advocated by the RAND Corporation [5]5 The RAND Corporation is an American nonprofit global policy think tank, often associated with research on military strategy and psychological warfare.; a postmodern "non-violent regime change model" relies on "swarm tactics," using carefully selected "sudden" events at a specific time to detonate the long-term results of ideological infiltration, overthrowing the existing regime in an instant. American futurist Alvin Toffler once prophetically stated, "Today's China is not very stable, and in the near future, it is possible that religious leaders will come to power." "The expansion of local religious protests into large-scale social actions" could very likely lead to the violent overthrow of the existing state power. Perhaps some hope this is a "self-fulfilling prophecy," but "whether the prophecy is realized depends on how people respond." (Samuel Huntington, *The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order*, p. 2) In socialist China, "managing religious affairs in accordance with the law, actively guiding religion to adapt to socialist society, promoting harmony in religious relations, and giving play to the positive role of religious figures and believers in promoting economic and social development" is not only the fundamental solution to the harmony of state-religion relations and political stability in our country, but also a "stone from another mountain" [6]6 "Stones from another mountain" (他山之石) is a Chinese idiom from the *Book of Songs* (《诗经》), meaning advice or lessons that can be drawn from others' experiences. to overcome the international religious and political crises plagued by the curse of the "clash of civilizations." (Author: Associate Professor, Department of Religious Studies, School of Philosophy, Wuhan University)

第三，建立长效的宗教突发事件危机处理机制。当今世界，美国主导的“新人权运动”在全球范围内极力推动“宗教政治化”、“政治运动化”，宗教因素与因特网、手机和软件平台结合，成为兰德公司推崇的“蜂拥战术”的理想载体之一；一种具有后现代特征的“非暴力政权更迭模式”依托于“蜂拥战术”， 用精心选择的某个时段的“突发”事件将长期的意识形态渗透成果引爆，顷刻推翻现政权。美国未来学家阿尔文•托夫勒曾经意味深长地预言，“当今的中国不太稳定，在不久的将来有可能会出现宗教领袖执政。”“局部宗教抗议扩大到大规模的社会行动”很可能会导致现有国家政权被暴力推翻。也许有人希望这是一个“自我实现的预言”，但是，“预言能否实现依赖于人们如何作出反应”。（塞缪尔•亨廷顿：《文明的冲突与世界秩序的重建》，第2页）在社会主义中国，“依法管理宗教事务、积极引导宗教与社会主义社会相适应、促进宗教关系的和谐、发挥宗教界人士和信教群众在促进经济社会发展中的积极作用。”不仅是我国政教和谐、政治稳定的根本解决之道，而且是克服被“文明冲突”魔咒困扰的国际宗教、政治危机的“他山之石”。（作者：武汉大学哲学学院宗教学系副教授）

Online Editor: Sunshine

网络编辑：阳光