Thy Kingdom Come: A Photographic History of Anglicanism in Hong Kong, Macau, and Mainland China

Abstract

Thy Kingdom Come presents a tribute to the twentieth anniversary of the Anglican province of Hong Kong, commemorating its history in Greater China in 177 photos, with the general audience in mind. It depicts the emergence of a hybrid, multicultural church, in addition to just an indigenized, Chinese church as commonly envisioned.Its first two parts, “Nineteenth-Century Beginnings (1807–1912)” and “The Chung Hua Sheng Kung Hui (Holy Catholic Church of China) and the Diocese of South China (1912–1951)”, constitute more than half of the collection, reflecting an emphasis on the early history of the church, in its transition from an organic start toward organization and synodical government, and in its active societal presence through to World War II. The subsequent parts of “The Diocese of Hong Kong and Macau (1951–1981)” and “The First Hong Kong Chinese Bishopric (1981–1998)” outline postwar developments of the church as a diocese. Following the political shift in China, the last meeting of the Chinese House of Bishops in 1956 marked the end of an era, while the Hong Kong diocese soon became detached in 1951 and remained so until 1998. The separation of the latter brief section of eleven photos indicates an emphasis on the indigenization of the bishopric. The final part concludes with the establishment of the Province of Hong Kong Sheng Kung Hui (1998–2018).At first glance, as the authors stress in the introduction, the book tells a story of indigenization, highlighting milestones of Chinese clergies in Hong Kong being first ordained as deacon (Lo Sam-Yuen), priest (Kwong Yat-Shau), bishop (Mok Shau-Tsang), and diocesan bishop (Peter Kwong Kong-Kit), who eventually established the province and was installed as the first archbishop and primate. This was accompanied by an increasing acknowledgment of women’s contribution: from being anonymous and behind the scene, to renowned socialites, and eventually priests and directors of the Church’s Welfare Council. Meanwhile, the church actively engaged in the community, providing medical, social, and educational services, leading to a disproportionately large contribution to the reconstruction of postwar Hong Kong, a result that is not fully covered in this narrative. Hence, too, regrettably, many names of early students at the Anglican schools, translation helpers, and even clergy may be lost to history. Among the first Chinese substantially exposed to Christianity and the Western world, they had much to offer in a radical era of revolution and unrest.However, closer examination reveals the hybridity of the church, most vividly seen in the highly contextualized architecture first at St John’s University in Shanghai, followed by churches and cathedrals in Beijing and Hong Kong, for example. Likewise, plurality was reflected in the outfits captured in the photos: from the missionaries’ indigenizing efforts to the wide spectrum of cross-cultural attire adopted by Chinese Anglicans and students in the 1900s–1910s, a phenomenon that continued in postwar Hong Kong during rapid westernization. Moreover, while Chinese Anglicans gradually assumed importance, Europeans remained on the scene: notably, it was the English reverend Joyce Bennett who accompanied the guest of honor at a 1978 ceremonial opening. This very book exemplifies this hybridity, being bilingual and coauthored by Philip L. Wickeri, advisor to the archbishop, and Ruiwen Chen, researcher at the Anglican Archives.The 1997 Handover seems to have brought about certain adjustments: there was a stronger presence of government officials from both Hong Kong and China, while the archbishops of Canterbury and Hong Kong entertained politicians and attended political gatherings, scenes unseen in previous photos. In this light, some translation discrepancies become awkward: regarding the colonial status of Hong Kong, “ceded” (被割讓) was translated as “reduced to” (淪為) (13); and upon 1997 the city was described as having “reverted to Chinese sovereignty” (170), which would have been more commonly termed “return” or “handover” before. Regarding the photos of the bishops at the final synod in 1947, the English caption describes them as “Chinese and citizens of the PRC” (102), but the Chinese description conflates the two.While the availability of photos posed objective limitations, this was substantially complemented by the comprehensive bibliography at the end. To conclude, this photographic history is an invaluable collection, and will be of interest to both the general public and scholars of Anglican history in the region.