Back in February the Sunday Times ran “China repents and seeks to woo Pope,” a story which claimed – on the basis of the comments from an anonymous Vatican source – that China and the Vatican are/were at an advanced stage in their negotiations over a resumption of diplomatic relations. For the moment neglecting what might be the dumbest and most wildly inaccurate China headlines of the last year [and one completely demolished by this one], I feel obliged to ask: Do these stories really matter? That is to say: Is the Vatican-Beijing story the one that matters most to China’s Catholics? Or is it just the one that the media prefers – for whatever reason – to cover?
It seems to me that these questions go to the very heart of how foreign media covers religion in China, and how – over the last few years – it has failed in its coverage of Tibetan Buddhism. Or, to put it more bluntly: Looking back over the last few years, isn’t it now obvious that far too many resources have been devoted to covering the Dalai Lama, and not enough to covering the peculiar and angry circumstances of everyday life in Tibet and its monasteries? To be sure, the former story is – on balance – much easier to cover. But which story would have equipped reporters – not to mention, readers – with the background knowledge and sources to explain the month’s news from West China?
Last year, in the wake of the Pope’s landmark letter to China’s Catholics, the overseas media engaged in a several week-long speculation on what effect – if any – the letter would have upon relations between the Vatican and Beijing. And yet, despite the fact that the letter’s primary focus is pastoral, very little (if any?) coverage outside of the Catholic media has focused upon the effect that the letter has had on the people who pack the pews every Sunday, in any Chinese city with a Catholic church. Similarly, almost no attention has been paid to the very significant efforts at reconciliation between China’s open and so-called “underground” Catholics (UCAN‘s unrelenting efforts to cover these developments has been nothing short of extraordinary). These efforts, more than anything happening in the halls of Vatican City, will define Chinese Catholic identity over the coming years. Still, it’s pretty much guaranteed that – whenever the foreign media next decides to cover events related to China’s burgeoning Catholics – the coverage will be dominated by speculation as to how the events will influence the Pope’s relationship with Beijing.
And, more likely than not, that coverage will fall around May 24, the date that Pope Benedict XVI has asked the world’s Catholics to turn their prayers to the Church in China (“This day is dedicated to the liturgical memorial of Our Lady, Help of Christians, who is venerated with great devotion at the Marian Shrine of Sheshan in Shanghai.“). As I write this post, the basilica is undergoing restorations and preparations for this day [I was there this morning, and I will post pictures [[update: photos posted here]] later today or tomorrow]; it is an event that invokes profound pride among Chinese Catholics, many of whom would like nothing more than to crowd into that Basilica and bask – for a mass, at least – in the knowledge that China, in its own way, has achieved a degree of pastoral normality that was unthinkable even ten years ago – and done so without diplomatic relations. Journalism that turns to politics, instead of that ground-level recognition, first, has – in my opinion – failed its subject and its readers.
[Special thanks to the non-publishable thoughts of friends in Belgium for inspiring this post.]
It’s a very provocative post. You’re not saying that the DL doesn’t matter,are you? If I understand correctly you’re saying that focusing on the DL to the exclusion of what life is actually like in Tibet was a mistake. You probably have some point here that there’s more to Tibetan life than the DL. At some point they had to adjust to his absence and get on with it. So what’s that like? I guess I agree that it feels like the press is busy playing catch up by trying to explain the ethnic tensions up there. Its interesting that nobodys really explaining why Tibetans and Hui don’t get along. Why did the Tibetans attack them? More interesting question than why they attack the Han … we know that answer.
Hello from Singapore. Too much blogging about religions this week. One or two is enough. Bring back the scrap. That is all I have to say.
I don’t think you are correct that the Pope is unimportant to Chinese Catholics. He is the unifying spirit of the Church.
Ken – Thank you for commenting, but that’s not what I wrote. My point is that the diplomatic tussle between Rome and Beijing has very little impact on the daily lives of Chinese Catholics. And, if the foreign media really wants to understand the dynamics at work in Chinese Catholicism, then the foreign media needs to become more familiar with the daily life and spirituality of Chinese Catholics – all of whom recognize the Pope’s central role in their faith.
Dollar Man – I’ll get back to blogging some business-oriented posts next week. For reasons obvious (Tibet) and coincidental, I’ve devoted much of this week to Chinese religion. In my defense – it’s been quite a while since I blogged religious themes so intensely.
“It seems to me that these questions go to the very heart of how foreign media covers religion in China”.
In my experience, the news media generally seem to lose about 50 IQ points when they cover the subject of religion in general and the Catholic Church in particular. Your blog, a notable exception.
Regards