...
It's probably going to turn into a modern twist on Confucianism, a sort of how to get along in civic life "spiritual" teaching, to be instituted no doubt to combat the entropy added by the Cultural Revolution, but State religion doesn't usually bode well for the people for long... depending, of course, on the character of the leaders. Few leaders have what it takes to make that work well for humanity.
The good part about Taoism and Buddhism is that they are not religions. They seem that way to casual observers and confused practitioners, but they are actually mystery schools, modes of preparing seekers' minds for insight, for realization, for enlightenment. They are meant only for that. Zen comes right out and says so explicitly, despite countless people ignoring that. Those holding onto the trappings after enlightenment are either public teachers or charlatans... mostly charlatans holding themselves out as public teachers.
But when the State took them up the masters were usually against it. Some emperors were more amenable to real sense and others not so much, but, overall, not even the best in the history of Chinese spirituality was ultimately a good thing when administrators got their mitts on it. The virtue and self-abnegation of real leaders are so difficult for the unenlightened to practice, almost no leader will pass up merely calling what they do "virtue", enforcing that label with power, relying on that to keep them regent.
I am afraid, though I know people I would call "good Christians", that this is just a really poor substitute for what was never a good idea for the unenlightened from the beginning of time.
always and any time....
