In the previous article, “If Revival Comes—China’s Church on the Brink of a Fifth Cycle,” I noted that if Chinese Christianity enters a fifth cycle, it would face at least two deficiencies: (1) gospel ministry aimed at corporate spiritual formation and (2) the development of a systematic and holistic theological understanding. I am convinced that Chinese Christianity will indeed experience this fifth cycle of revival. If so, the deficiencies that revival will face must be addressed and completed by the future Chinese church. I emphasize “the future Chinese church” because the current forms and structures of the church in China neither recognize the needs of a coming revival nor are able to proactively grow—indeed, to change—so as to carry it. Therefore, before the next revival, today’s church in China will inevitably enter a process of upheaval, reorganization, and re-stabilization, forming a new structural ecosystem capable of laying the groundwork for renewal and carrying forward the next phase of revival.
In this article, drawing on observation and research, I outline the current structural forms of the church in China, analyze the present upheaval, and discuss how reorganization and stabilization may unfold.
Current Structural Forms
The church in China today is composed of several forms: Three-Self churches (三自教会), evangelical churches (福音派教会), Assembly Hall (Little Flock) churches (聚会处/小群), Wenzhou churches (温州教会), Reformed Presbyterian churches (中国改革宗长老会), Reformed Baptist churches (中国改革宗浸信会), and emerging urban independent churches (新兴城市独立教会).
Because these forms differ in history, pace, and perspectives—and have coexisted for roughly three decades—the church in China is undergoing notable upheavals: conflicts between old and new ideas, between theology and tradition, and over succession. These tensions appear within each form, between forms, within China’s changing environment, and in the search for a way forward. Below are representative snapshots.
Conflicts Between Old and New Ideas
Conflicts between older and newer approaches are widespread. To keep the church from straying, many senior leaders adopt conservative strategies—holding fast to past doctrines, traditional methods, and even outdated assumptions in the name of safety. Yet they often lack the courage and wisdom to address the younger generation’s questions amid rapid social change, resorting instead to denial, intimidation, or suppression.
Younger believers tend to respond in two ways. Some practice silent resistance—they attend but do not speak, serve, or submit. Others choose direct confrontation—leaving to found new churches, which brings division. This upheaval will continue for a time. During it, some tradition-bound elders will step aside; their successors will—however imperfectly—adapt to generational change and eventually stabilize new patterns. Other elders, recognizing the times, will use their deep spiritual lives, experience, and resources to support the next generation, helping them stand on solid foundations while stepping onto the “stage of history” with fresh vision. Meanwhile, independent and emerging urban churches, after early enthusiasm cools, collisions among coworkers, and pressure from ideal–reality gaps, will see minor splits and recombination. Most will stabilize with distinct characteristics; some will not endure.
Conflicts Between Theology and Tradition
Since the early 21st century, conflicts between theology and tradition have become more visible. The tension is not between “the Bible and church history” and some holistic theological outlook; rather, it is often one specific theological camp versus tradition, or one camp versus another.
Given that the contemporary Chinese church spans little more than 160 years, theological understanding before 2000 was often vague and piecemeal, accumulated in practice rather than formed systematically. After 2000, more pastors and seminarians trained overseas returned and began promoting theological education. While positive in intent, implementation brought shock and resistance. Promoters sometimes underestimated the gap, assuming diligent instruction alone would raise comprehension; instead, the gap produced confusion. In other cases, promoters themselves lacked systematic and holistic grounding, promoted their own camp excessively, and when narrowness or error surfaced, observers rightly questioned or criticized it.
As this dynamic continued, some groups standardized and color-coded their theological identity to distinguish themselves—often heightening antagonism. This upheaval will likely persist until, through painful lessons and self-examination, groups are drawn toward systematic and holistic theology—which is broad, rich, and capacious. From there, churches holding different theological views can move from antagonism to enrichment, recognizing both shared essentials and their own gaps, and gradually emphasizing common faith over badge-displaying differences.
The Upheaval of Succession
Succession tensions are playing out now as the third generation of Chinese pastors (post-1901) reaches retirement, while the fourth generation assumes leadership unevenly.
- Leader shortage and aging congregations. Many rural (and some urban) churches struggle to find successors; third-generation pastors are sometimes the “younger” ones on site.
- Distrust of successors. Some current pastors assess candidates by standards such as endurance, humility, obedience, and self-denial. The next generation, formed in different conditions, embodies these differently, which fuels concern; yet older pastors often lack means to shape successors who meet their expectations.
- Power and control. With church growth, some leaders accumulated significant money and power, lost the fear of the Lord and commitment to truth, and chose compliant successors while suppressing others. Conversely, some potential successors, impatient to take charge, challenge and attack predecessors.
- A healthier path. Some senior pastors, mindful that the church belongs to Christ, use their spiritual foundation and resources to support the next generation, walking with them until they release leadership unconditionally. The younger generation, grateful for the Spirit’s trust and the elders’ confidence, leads with clearer vision and renewed hope. This pattern—each generation serving the next—can stabilize succession and better position the church for a new revival.
A Note on Complexity
The church in China has developed in a distinct environment and system, largely independent from patterns elsewhere. A defining feature is the absence of a widely recognized governance framework or growth order; most structures formed organically in practice, yielding high complexity and diversity. This article does not aim to exhaust every situation; rather, it summarizes numerous real cases to offer multi-angled understanding and to encourage reflection, learning, and preparation for the next revival.
Appendix: Brief Introductions to Key Forms
Three-Self churches (三自教会). Agencies within the state religious administration. As the only public, legal Protestant entities, their planning and development are directed by government departments; thus, they follow extra-ecclesial rules. A few independent congregations within the system attempt more organic development but do not alter the overall framework.
Evangelical churches (福音派教会). Large and diverse. As identities clarified, especially after the Boxer Rebellion, churches emphasized self-propagation, self-governance, and self-support. Facing liberal theology, many asserted an evangelical stance; some could articulate confessional roots; many could not—yet still identified as evangelical.
Assembly Hall / Little Flock (聚会处/小群). Associated with Watchman Nee, with clear theology and ecclesial practice, influential in Zhejiang, Jiangxi, Shanghai, Henan, Shandong, and the Northeast. Marked by strong tradition-bound adherence, rigorous practice, and cautious engagement with other groups.
Wenzhou churches (温州教会). A distinct ecosystem found across China and globally, largely founded and led by people from Wenzhou. They share a strong entrepreneurial ethos, frequent partnerships with well-known domestic and overseas actors, and readiness to pilot projects and ministries. Historically strong on public initiatives, they have recently invested more in full-time pastoral training and theological education, becoming early movers in these areas.
Reformed Presbyterian & Reformed Baptist churches (改革宗长老会/改革宗浸信会). Both rose in recent decades. Reformed Presbyterians emphasize Reformed/Calvinist theology and have grown in influence through close ties with like-minded overseas churches and notable figures/events. Reformed Baptists have expanded more moderately, often rallying around Nine Marks of a Healthy Church, gradually forming networks and scale.
Emerging urban independent churches (新兴城市独立教会). Proliferated in the last 30 years, often founded by overseas missionaries, returnees, and young urban believers. Generally smaller, flexible, and frequently non-denominational (or early in denominational learning and development).
在前文 “倘若中国再次复兴，中国基督教将进入第五个起伏阶段” 中，笔者提到第五个阶段基督教在中国的兴起，我们将面对至少两个方面的缺乏，一是以群体属灵塑造为目标的福音活动，二是整全神学认知的建设。笔者坚信基督教在中国必定会迎来第五阶段的复兴，那么将来复兴面对的缺乏，必将由将来的中国教会实施补充并完成建设。
之所以在此强调 “将来的中国教会”，乃是因为今天的中国教会形态和结构，无法认识到将来基督教在中国复兴的所需，也没有能力主动成长（其实更需要的是改变）去承载将来基督教在中国的复兴。如此，在再次复兴之前，现在的中国教会将不可避免地进入震荡、重组和再次稳定的进程，从而形成将来新结构形态的中国教会，为补足复兴的所需打造基础，从而有能力承载新的复兴阶段。
本文将就笔者的观察研究呈现当前中国教会的形态结构，解析当前中国教会正面临的震荡期，以及未来将发生如何的重组及稳定。
当前中国教会主要由几种形态构成，分别是：三自教会、福音派教会、聚会处教会（小群）、温州教会、中国改革宗长老会教会、中国改革宗浸信会教会、新兴城市独立教会。
因为中国教会各形态结构发展的历史、速度和观点存在差异，且这些差异已经存在并共存了三十年左右的时间，故而中国教会到今天为止，处于一些比较明显的震荡之中。这些震荡主要体现为新老思想的对抗，神学与传统的对抗，接班传承的对抗。这些震荡又存在于各形态结构自身传统中，各形态结构之间，中国不断变化的处境中，以及在为将来寻找出路的过程中。本文将从一些实际存在的案例出发，进行简单呈现。
新老思想的对抗已经普遍性存在，许多教会的属灵长者为了确保教会不偏离正道，会众的信仰不会因为接触太多外来的新东西而偏离正道，选择采取保守的策略。他们持守过去的教义，持守传统的方式，甚至固守过去的思想，并以此为确保教会的安全。
然而，他们不能勇敢且积极地面对世代的巨变，不能自信且有智慧地解答年轻一代面对的问题和挣扎，常常采取否定、威吓、打压的方式，尝试让年轻一代降服于传统，而不是凭信心和从神来的智慧去面对未来。
这导致年轻一代出现两类回应，一类是沉默但不接受的对抗，年轻一代在教会选择不发声、不服事、不顺从，仅身体出现在教会当中；另一种是剧烈的直接对抗，一些不能认可传统思想的年轻人选择离开教会，或者一群人一起离开教会另立新的教会，带来教会的分裂。
此类震荡仍将持续一段时间，在此期间，一些固守传统的长者会离去，他们的继任者不会像他们那样固守传统，从而被动地去面对和适应世代的变化，虽然会出现不同的情形，但最终都会在新的形态下稳定下来。
一些长者会关注到世代变化的现实，选择用他们坚实的属灵生命、丰富的经历和积累的资源扶持和托住下一代，让下一代既有属灵的根基，又可以踏上历史的台阶，带着异象积极迎接新的世代。
另外一些独立出去的教会和城市新兴教会，会在经历激情降温，同工差异化思想的碰撞，以及现实与理想落差的压力之后，仍然会出现小的分裂、重组，最终大多数会带着自己的特征稳定下来，但难免一些会坚持不下去而退出。
神学与传统的震荡进入21世纪后越来越明显。在中国教会形态中，与传统产生冲突的神学并非圣经以及教会历史中演变过来的整全神学，而是某一类神学观与传统的对立与冲突，或者一类神学观与另外一类神学观的对立与冲突。中国当代教会历史短短160多年，相较于教会历史和神学发展史是非常短暂的。
2000 年之前，中国教会对神学的概念是非常模糊的，中国教会的神学观也是不知不觉生成然后零散式存在着，并且是在信仰实践中一点一点积累起来的，完全缺乏对神学的系统性认识。
2000 年之后，越来越多从海外接受过神学装备的神学生、牧者回到国内，他们看到国内教会对神学的认知如此模糊感到非常惊讶，如此开始在国内进行神学的推广。
这原本是好的事情，然而在实际推广中，产生了不小的震荡和对抗。一方面神学推广者忽视或低估了神学认知的差距，以为把自己装备的尽心传授，中国教会的神学认知就会发生改变和提升，然而实际却面对认知提升方面极大的阻力，并且因为认知差距过大，反而给受教者一时之间带来混乱。
另一方面，推广者本身并没有掌握整全的神学装备，更不代表整全的神学观，但他们在推广过程中面对神学认知较低的受教者产生了优越感，过高地推崇自己的神学观，以致于后来被人发现其神学认知偏狭甚至错谬的时候，引发受教者或者旁观者的质疑乃至批判。
第三个方面在第二个方面持续发展的基础上，持守某种类别神学观的群体，为了更清晰地区分与传统的差别，甚至为了更加突出所持守神学观的优越性，将该类神学标准化、特色化地界定出来，并且常常与其他类别的神学观相比较，难免造成在神学立场上的对立。
此类震荡仍将持续一段时期，直至在此期间彼此承受一些伤害，发现自身的不足，更重要的是被整全的神学所震撼（整全的神学是博大、丰富且具包容性的，此将另文呈现）。
届时，持不同类别神学观的群体将会停止对立或彼此攻击，而是从自身神学视角出发被整全的神学吸引，发现自己所持守神学类别的缺乏，反思并丰富对神学的认知和寻求，最终，在中国持有各类别神学观的教会越来越发现信仰的共性，而不再越来越标榜各自的差异。
接班传承的震荡正在当下中国教会上演，因为中国本土第三代牧者（从1901年之后算起）均已经在退休年龄段，然第四代牧者的承接并不顺畅，这存在几种不同的情形。
有些教会难以找到继任者，教会老龄化已经成为中国乡镇及农村教会的普遍现象，也存在于一些城市教会中，当前第三代牧者已经算是教会的年轻一代，难以找到更年轻的信徒成为教会领袖继续带领教会前行。
第二种情形是现在的牧者对继任者的不信任，他们会以吃苦、谦卑、顺服、舍己等标准来衡量继任者，然而，新一代牧者在有别于上一代人成长环境的新环境中成长，他们对这些标准的认知和表现也必定有别于上一代人。
上一代牧者看不到新一代牧者合乎他们标准的素质，从审慎的角度思考感到非常担忧，然而他们又没有办法寻找或塑造出合乎他们标准的继任者。
第三种情形比较严峻，在过去一两代牧者教会服事中，教会规模越来越大，教会牧者所掌握的钱财和权力也非常可观。
一大批教会的带领者在钱财和权力的影响下失去了敬畏之心和真理的方向，在选择继任者时，为了更好地控制局面，对顺从者抬举，对不顺从者打压。另外，也存在一些潜在的继任者，急于接管教会的管理，失去等候的耐心，向上一代牧者发起挑战和攻击。
第四种情形是现在看起来比较健康的情形，也将是影响以上三种情形经历震荡之后趋于稳定的存在。一些年长的牧者存着敬畏的心清楚地知道教会是属于基督的，他们走过了他们该走的路，拥有了一些属灵的资源，但他们也发现了自己面对新世代的缺乏，因此，他们选择了用自己的属灵根基和资源去扶持下一代牧者，并全心地陪伴新一代的牧者走一段路，直至无条件地放手。
新一代牧者感恩于圣灵的托付和上一代牧者信任的基础上，以更清晰的异象引领，带着更有盼望和积极的心态，轻装前行。这种上一代抛开自己的私欲面向基督扶持下一代，下一代再同样扶持下一代的情形，同心所向，能够让中国教会的接班传承稳定下来，并且也必将顺应新的复兴。
我们必须指出，中国教会的存在和成长有其完全独立的处境和体系，并且很大程度上是完全独立于世界其他国家基督教教会形态。中国教会最大的独特特征，是缺乏公认的管理体系和成长秩序，大多数教会形态都是在实践发展中自发形成和随机进行管理，因此，中国教会的形态和现象极其复杂多样。
本文并无能力完整地呈现中国教会全部的情形，但本文所述，皆是根据众多真实的案例归纳总结所得。笔者本意是让读者更多角度了解中国教会现状，并为迎接基督教在中国的再次复兴，做出一些反思、借鉴和预备。
附录：中国教会各形态结构简介
三自教会属于政府宗教管理序列中的机构，表面上是唯一合法且对外开放的基督教机构，由政府宗教管理部门主导其规划和发展，因此，三自教会不会遵循基督教自然发展的法则，而是受到基督教之外的法则规划和限定。虽然少数三自教会体系内的独立教会或机构尝试遵循基督教自然发展的法则，但也仅属于大树底下乘凉的角色，并不能影响三自教会固有的体系。
福音派教会在中国是非常庞大且复杂的存在。福音派教会是在中国基督教发展过程中，为了明确表明立场区分身份而逐渐凸显出来的。19 世纪中叶福音来到中国，那时有大量宣教士来到中国传福音、建立教会，来自西方各种宗派的宣教士都有，因此，各种背景的教会散落地分布在中国各地。20世纪初庚子事变之后，宣教士离场，中国教会开始自传、自治、自养，并开展许多福音事工，福音派神学和立场开始逐渐显露出来。紧接着面对自由神学的极大挑战，中国教会为了表明身份，持守立场与自由神学相抗，少数教会（主要是城市教会）明确表明自己的神学背景，但大多数教会不能明确表明自己的神学背景，开始强调自己是福音派教会，甚至有一段时间以自己为持守基要真理的福音派引以为傲。因此在中国曾经有这样的现象存在，一些教会并不明白何谓福音派，但却坚称自己为福音派。
聚会处教会又称为小群教会，比较明确主要是由倪柝声创立，有清晰的神学思想和教会实践，在浙江、江西、上海、河南、山东、东北三省等地有较大影响。他们的主要特点是持守并维护传统，教会实践严苛，与其他群体的接触非常审慎。
温州教会自成体系，不仅遍布全国各地城市，而且也大量分布在全球许多城市。这些教会主要由温州人建立并参与其中，故而被称为温州教会。他们有许多相似之处，带有浓厚的商业气息和思维，但其实温州教会又分为很多类别，只是外人并不容易分辨。温州教会与国内外知名的个人或团队联系比较频密，能够频繁地从国内外引进许多相对超前的项目、课程及事工，有的存留至今，有的短暂存在即消失不见。温州教会在公共项目和事工投入方面特别热心，但在过去很长时期，对于全职服事的个人却以鼓励他们走付代价吃苦的道路为主。近些年来，一些温州教会开始大力栽培和扶持全职的牧职人员和神学教育师资，这也走在了中国教会的前列。
中国改革宗长老会和浸信会几乎是在相同的时期内成长并凸显出来。改革宗长老会在中国教会历史中一直存在，只是并没有很突出地显明出来。今天在中国提到改革宗长老会，与过去的改革宗长老会是有分别的，他们强调归正神学，强调加尔文神学思想和神学要义。过去 30 年时间，他们与境外同样持守归正神学及加尔文神学思想的教会联系紧密，再因为一些特殊的人物以及不寻常的事件而声名鹊起，且其影响力在海内外迅速崛起。相对于改革宗的兴起，浸信会成长比较温和，他们共同持守《健康教会九标志》，慢慢自成体系，且规模越来越壮大。
新兴城市教会在近30年如雨后春笋般兴起。新兴城市教会主要由海外宣教士、海外归回人员、城市年轻群体建立的教会。新兴城市教会的特点普遍规模较小，没有传统的背景，教会运作比较灵活，多数没有宗派背景，有宗派背景的也处于学习和建设过程中。