Chapter One
Confucianism and Christianity

An Introduction

Colin Hoad

 

“If we were to characterize in one word the Chinese way of life for the last two thousand years, the word would be ‘Confucian’. No other individual in Chinese history has so deeply influenced the life and thought of his people, as a transmitter, teacher and creative interpreter of the ancient culture and literature and as a moulder of the Chinese mind and character”

[William Theodore de Bary, John Mitchell Mason Professor of the University, Emeritus, Columbia University and former President of the Association of Asian Studies]

 

“Christianity…gradually developed, from a teaching to a movement, from a movement to a religion. Finally, by conquering first Europe and then almost one-quarter of the whole world’s population, it emerged as one of the most significant religions in human history.”

[Dr. Xinzhong Yao, Professor of the Department of Philosophy at the People’s University of China, Beijing]


Confucianism and Christianity: United or Divided?

            “After about 400 years of study and research, Confucianism in the West is still a subject which only involves a small group of scholars.”[i] This disturbing fact is brought even closer to home when it is realized, as will explained later, just how much of an effect Confucius and his philosophy has had, and still has, on the peoples of not only China, but also Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and Singapore. East Asia is indebted to the philosophy of the man they call Master K’ung (K’ung Fu Tzu), but we in the West are still a long way behind both understanding and proliferating the message of the “quintessential Chinese sage”[ii]. Ironically, one reason that accounts for this breach in cultural awareness comes in the form of what stands in the West largely for what Confucianism stands for in the Far East: Christianity.

            The relationship that these two great doctrines have shared since their first meeting in 635 CE has been one of curiosity and confusion, unity and understanding, but more frequently, direct aggravation and antithesis. It is perhaps something of a paradox that two of the world’s most prominent benevolent traditions have found so much to disagree on and become estranged as a result.

            The first time that Confucianism and Christianity were to encounter one another came with the Nestorian visit to China in 635 CE. The Chinese did not perceive Christianity as an entirely new religion, believing it to be yet another strand of Buddhism. God was known as fo (Buddha), heavenly figures were fawang (Kings of the Dharma) and the symbol of the cross was usually pictured within a Buddhist lotus flower. 200 years later, imperial policy on foreign religions changed, and all faiths not native to China were banished, among them Nestorian Christians. Whilst it is true the Nestorians encountered Confucianism and did indeed fulfil a number of Confucian rites during their time in China, no real theological or philosophical debate emerged. It was not until the end of the 16th century when Italian Jesuit Matteo Ricci and a group of missionaries came to China that Confucianism and Christianity were to meet head on.

            When Ricci first came to China, he had assumed that Buddhism was the dominant faith, and so he and his missionaries shaved their heads, donned Buddhist robes and came to China under the guise of ‘Monks from the West’. It was not until they arrived in China that they saw Buddhism was a minority religion with a long history of persecution in China, and that it was Confucius, not Buddha, who commanded the faith of the Chinese. Accordingly, Ricci’s first visit was short-lived (including a brief spell in the Emperor’s prisons), and he and his fellow Jesuits retired to the nearby mountains where they grew their hair long and dressed themselves in the long flowing ‘Mandarin’ robes of the Confucian style before making their second visit to the Emperor.

            Ricci was not of the arrogant evangelist school that the Christian Church has been plagued with through the centuries; he recognized almost immediately, and understood, the importance of Confucius to the Chinese. He devoted his time to studying the Confucian Classics, translating them into Latin, and addressing his speeches to the Confucian literati of China. His introduction of Western technology and science to the Imperial Court gained him much respect, and it was from this venerated position that he was able to introduce his adaptation of Christianity to the Confucians. It was his aim to make “such ‘adjustments’ in the Christian religion that his Chinese converts could not differentiate it from Confucianism.”[iii] In his eyes, there was a fundamental agreement between Christianity and Confucianism, and he spent the rest of his life pursuing a growth of relationship between the two traditions.

            In the heady atmosphere of early Ming China, religious tolerance reached its peak, as all faiths were viewed as one. However, this peaceful environment was soon to be shattered by a combination of Confucian scholarly discourse and the intervention of Rome. As will be seen, ancestral worship is an ingrained Chinese custom, and for many Chinese, the idea of worshipping Jesus Christ was an elevation of one spirit above another. The Jesuits were accused of turning their “back[s] upon the ancestors in favour of an unclean ghost”[iv] and ignoring the great Confucian sages. The concept of Tian (Heaven) and self-cultivation conflicted drastically at times with God and worship – giving oneself over to God was, for the Confucians, like “abandon[ing] cultivating their virtue in order to concentrate upon cultivating favours from Heaven.”[v] Praying to God in expectation of help or assistance appeared a very unrighteous action for the Confucians. As an early twentieth century Confucian was to remark, “you should not insist that there is only one Christ, while others can be merely Christians. Jesus is merely a sage, why must we be saved through him? Why is Jesus able directly to be [in God] while we cannot?”[vi]

            It comes as no surprise that misconstrued ideas were to emerge on both sides. Rome was by this time becoming increasingly intolerant of Confucianism, fuelled further by the translations of key Confucian ideals. As remains to be seen, the Chinese concept of Tian (Heaven) is not the same as the Christian concept, nor indeed is the Tianzi (Son of Heaven). The Catholic outburst was to decree a prohibition on Confucianism in China; but the Pope was to find that his new converts were not the obedient kind he was used to. Emperor Kang Xi expelled all the Jesuits from his country, and made the statement that the Christians “preach heresy like Buddhist monks or Taoist priests. From now on it is not necessary for Westerners to engage in religious activities in China, and we forbid it.”[vii]

            In the early nineteenth century, Protestant missionaries arrived in China, among their number the acclaimed translator James Legge who was to later translate all of the Confucian Classics into English. Confucians viewed these new Westerners as different to those who had visited a century or so ago. This is, incidentally, why in China there are two words for the Christian God – namely one for the Catholic God and another for the Protestant. The resultant understanding here was much the same as before. Whilst a number of Protestant missionaries became very much engaged in Chinese thought and that “it was not so rare for Protestant missionaries in China to be so overwhelmed by the profundity of Chinese thought that they would reverse their rôle and return to the West, so to speak, as ‘Chinese missionaries’”[viii] they never-the-less came across the same difficulties as their Catholic brethren had done before them.

A Glimmer of Hope?

            After such a seemingly troubled history, with differences flaring up on innumerable occasions, one may well be left asking to what extent Confucianism has any relevance to Christians today. It is, after all, a fair question. To the average Christian, the philosophy of Confucius is either the folded up piece of paper inside a fortune cookie, or else, given his Latinized name, the work of a Roman philosopher of whom they have no knowledge. If Christians are genuinely aware of him and the importance of his teachings to East Asia, they may still find it difficult to reconcile themselves to finding any relevance in what he has had to say. Yet, all is not lost, by any means.

            The spread of Christianity into China in recent years might well lead one to believing that Confucianism has very little to offer even to its ‘own people’ as a spiritual or ethical philosophy. However, despite this, “most scholarly-minded Chinese Christians acknowledge their indebtedness to Confucianism. Seldom do you find a Chinese Christian who repudiates Confucianism wholesale. Not to speak of repudiation, criticism of Confucianism is uncommon among Chinese Christians.”[ix] If this is the case, then the balance could well work for Western Christians. To be sure, Confucianism is cultural heritage to the Chinese, but it goes beyond mere historical pride, as will be seen. Perhaps one of the reasons Christians in the West are reluctant, in the knowledge of Confucianism, to accept any of its values, is that they do not wish to be ‘converted’ to another tradition. Christianity has its own vast and rich legacy, and they do not wish to drift from its steadfast path into the religious ideals of other faiths or doctrines. Yet, “the dialogue between contemporary New Confucianism and Christianity does not mean to convert one from another, but to expand one’s horizon so as to incorporate some of the values, experiences and insights from the other,”[x] and it is in this that the question of relevance becomes clearer. It is not a matter of shifting from one belief to another – it is the case of finding common ground between the two, and building on this with an aim to understanding and strengthening faith, be it Christian or Confucian.

The Aim

            With this in mind, the progression of this paper will divide into several distinct sections. Before embarking on an understanding of each side of the argument, a look into the similarities and differences between Confucius and Christ will be necessary so as to ground the study in firm soil. A comparison between the Christian concept of ‘agape’ and the Confucian one of ‘jen’ will form a large percentage of the piece, and this will be followed up by a look at Neo-Confucianism, subsequent Confucian scholars, the Confucian view of the supernatural (and how this compares to Christianity), modern interpretations of Confucianism, how Confucianism impacts the world today (East and West), and a final evaluation of precisely what relevance Confucius does have to the contemporary Christian.

Religion or Philosophy?

            Before this study can truly begin, it is first necessary to deal with one of the questions that has dogged Confucian debate ever since the West was made aware of it. Are the teachings of Confucius and his subsequent Confucian scholars the makings of religion, or simply philosophy? To begin, we shall examine a number of views, both for it being a religion and for it being a philosophy.

            Dr. Yao theorizes that all mature religions are based upon a three-way relationship, involving human beings, Nature and the Transcendent[xi]. Dependent upon where the emphasis in this relationship is placed dictates the character of the religion. Theistic religions, such as Judaism and Islam place the Transcendent at the centre; Natural religions, such as Taoism and Shintô, place Nature at the centre; and Humanistic religions, such as Buddhism and Jainism, place human beings at the centre. However, to view religions like this does not deny that a theistic religion has elements of humanism in it, or that a humanistic religion has elements of the Transcendent in it. The idea that Dr. Yao presents is that religions will hold one part of the three-way relationship above the other two. For him, Christianity is a classic example of a theistic religion, whilst Confucianism is the epitome of a humanistic religion. Neither denies the importance or significance of the Transcendent or the human being, but the former claims the Transcendent as the beginning and end of existence, whilst the latter sees this position filled by human beings.

            Hans Küng has another theory, which supports Dr. Yao’s, of classifying religions by their origin. For him, there are three distinct types: the prophetic Semitic religions of Christianity, Islam and Judaism; the mystical Indian religions of Buddhism, Hinduism and Jainism; and the wisdom Chinese religions of Taoism and Confucianism. Thus, we can see that there are a number of scholars who see Confucianism as a religion rather than a mere system of ethics; but how have other views come to pass?

            The problem that many people have in their perception of Confucianism as a religion is that it has taken on so many varied shapes and forms that there is no definitive single-strand train of thought which can be labelled ‘Confucianism’. However, we should not be dissuaded by this; after all, few Christians would see their religion as a single-strand thought. There are a number of views held about Confucianism, and these tend towards three discrete categories. Some people see Confucius’s teachings as morality and ethics – a system rather than a religion. This is indeed how many philosophers regard Confucius; he has often been classified amongst the rank and file of J.S. Mill and other theorizers on morality. The second view is that Confucianism is a socio-political system, a view that has developed from the dominance Confucian thought has held over East Asia over the course of the past 2,000 years. The final view is that Confucianism is not a philosophy or an ethic, but rather a tradition of learning, a group of literati with a devotion to education. There is an element of truth in each of these views. However, they are correct only in what they assert – they fall down in what they deny. Confucianism is all that these three views hold it to be, and much more besides.

            Ninian Smart believes that Confucianism should be split into two[xii]. Confucian thought is the name he gives to the philosophy of Confucius and the subsequent teachings of later scholars. ‘Confucianism’ for him is rather the religious cult that has sprung up as a result of the philosophy. This view is very popular in the West, where people are reluctant to acknowledge Confucianism as a religion in its own right. However, many Confucian scholars see this division as devaluing what Confucianism stands for. They would rather see it as “a language of a moral community flowing from universal moral values”[xiii] A further problem exists, not from a Western perspective, but native to China itself. The word ‘religion’ means something quite different to the Chinese. To call Confucianism tsung chiao implies a superstitious dogma, rather than the meaning implied in English. Thus, objection to Confucianism being called a religion comes from the Chinese as well. They would prefer it be called a chia (school) or tao (the Way).

            There are those who feel Confucianism cannot be a ‘true’ religion since it lacks any form of hierarchy. Now, there are others who see the institution of a clergy and a definitive body as an obstruction to religion, but for those who maintain it is fundamental to religion, this is an obstacle to Confucianism’s qualification as such. However, in both China and Korea’s Confucian part, where Confucianism has been the state religion, the State has proved to be a stronger ‘Church’ than many others in other faiths. The position of scholar-official has been filled by Confucians, and the Emperor has acted as the true fide defensor of Confucianism. Given the power the Christian Church has played in politics for hundreds of years, to deny Confucianism’s place within the State as a church would be ambiguous in the extreme.

            What must therefore be understood is that Confucianism is very much a religion for the purposes of the Chinese. The main problem is in understanding the difference between theistic and humanistic religion. Scholars would be right to say that Confucianism is not a theistic religion, but they would be incorrect to say that this means it is not a religion at all. The West is accustomed to theism, since the religions of the Western tradition are for the most part Christianity and Islam. If we are to remove these tinted spectacles and see Confucianism for what it is, namely a humanistic religion, our understanding of it will become that much clearer. Thus, for this study, we will be dealing with Confucianism and Christianity as both religions and philosophies. For, just as Confucianism is a religion embedded in the philosophy of Confucius, so Christianity is a religion with a vast array of philosophic concepts of its own.

On Translation, Quotation and Grammar

            Besides the philosophic and theological problems that are to be encountered in a study such as this, one must be aware of linguistic ones also. Aside from the valuable secondary sources written by scholars of Confucianism today, many quotations will be taken from original sources. Since Confucius and his teachings, as well as those of his subsequent disciples, were all written in Ancient Chinese, any parts used will be of translations. For the most part, these will come from William Soothill’s versions, but on occasion, others may be used and their sources attributed where necessary. Along with this, there is a cultural difference with regard to names. Whilst we in the West place the forename first and the surname last, in China it is reversed. Confucius’s first name was Ch’iu, but he is written as K’ung Ch’iu. It is the same today, and so quotations taken from Weiming Tu, Wing-tsit Chan and so forth will be written alongside the Western scholars with surname first and forename last in the endnotes. Finally, the word tzu in Chinese refers to a philosopher-teacher, and is roughly translated as ‘Master’. Thus, people like Confucius (K’ung Fu Tzu) and Mencius (Meng Tzu) if quoted by their original names will include their title, since this is how they are referred to in China.

[BACK]
[CHAPTER 1][CHAPTER 2][CHAPTER 3][CHAPTER 4]
[CHAPTER 5][CHAPTER 6][CHAPTER 7][CHAPTER 8]



[i] Yao, Dr. Xinzhong, "An Introduction to Confucianism" (Cambridge University Press, 2000)

[ii] de Bary, Professor Wm. Theodore, "The Trouble With Confucianism" (Harvard University Press, 1996)

[iii] Young, John D., “Confucianism and Christianity – The First Encounter” (Hong Kong University Press, 1938)

[iv] Wang, Fuzhi – the idea that worship should be given over to a man executed by the State for religious crimes was not an appealing one to many Chinese scholars

[v] Wang, Fuzhi as quoted in "An Introduction to Confucianism" (Cambridge University Press, 2000)

[vi] Mou, Zongsan, “Er Hu Monthly”

[vii] Fang, Hao, as quoted in “The History of Communication between China and the West” (Taipei, 1959)

[viii] Jaspers, Karl “The Great Philosophers: The Foundations” (London, 1962)

[ix] Lee, Peter K. H., “Confucian-Christian Encounter in Historical and Contemporary Perspectives” (The Edwin Mellen Press, 1991)

[x] Lee, Peter K. H., “Confucian-Christian Encounter in Historical and Contemporary Perspectives” (The Edwin Mellen Press, 1991)

[xi] Yao, Dr. Xinzhong, "Confucianism and Christianity" (Sussex Academic Press, 1997)

[xii] Smart, Ninian, “The World’s Religion: Old Traditions and Modern Transformations” (Cambridge University Press, 1989)

[xiii] Tu, Professor Weiming, as quoted in "Confucianism and Christianity" (Sussex Academic Press, 1997)