Chapter Five
Confucianism and Christianity

Transcendence and the Supernatural

Colin Hoad

“When you study the occult and perform miracles, later generations always tell about it. This I won’t do.”

[Confucius, “The Doctrine of the Mean”]

“Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign? I tell you the truth, no sign will be given to it.”

[Mark 8:12]

Heaven and Tian

            In Beijing, there is an impressive architectural structure that points to the sky. It is called the Temple of Heaven. For Confucians, it is the most sacred of places in their tradition, but we must first understand what is meant by ‘Heaven’ before we can continue with our study into Confucian and Christian transcendence. The Chinese word Tian does not denote a place or realm, as might be believed by its translation into English as ‘Heaven’. Rather, Tian refers to the Transcendent force in Confucianism, a Being who is actively part of the world, and is unified to Earth and human beings by jen. Tian acts almost like the concept of fate in the West – Tian has predetermined everything that will happen in the future, and all of time is bound by Tian. Yet, Tian does not hold the same position in Confucianism as God does in Christianity. Confucians acknowledge Tian’s existence with much reverence, and they offer rituals to Tian, but they do not see Tian as being the all-pervading force that God is in Christianity. Tian is not so powerful as the omnipotent Judeo-Christian God, and is not concerned about people loving Him. He is a god to whom Confucians give praise,  but they do not rely upon Him for their existence, enlightenment and salvation. Confucianism is a humanistic tradition, and whilst it has a Transcendent force in its midst, it is not beholden unto this force in the same way as Christians are to their God.

            Confucius had a number of things to say about Tian, which will be invaluable to our understanding of what He is. He once warned an official that “he who offends against Heaven has none to whom he can pray”[i], thus demonstrating the importance of Tian to Confucians. Of himself, Confucius made such statements as “Heaven is going to use your master as a bell with its wooden tongue”[ii], which have lead some subsequent scholars to see Confucius in the light of a prophet. Indeed, prophets are by no means an alien concept to Confucianism as we shall later see. Tian appears to govern inevitability, as witnessed by Confucius’s personal lament at the death of Po-niu: “it is the appointment of Heaven, alas!”[iii] Tian also seems to have a certain amount of divine judgement, since Confucius said on the occasion of his visiting Nan-tsze (a ‘sexually excessive’ woman) that “wherein I have done improperly, may Heaven reject me, may Heaven reject me!”[iv] At the same time, Tian is responsible for investing virtues into Man, as Confucius states clearly “Heaven produced the virtue that is in me.”[v] Furthermore, at times Confucius believes that only “Heaven knows me.”[vi]

            The relationship between Confucians and Tian would seem to be one of mutual recognition and respect – but the Confucian seems to appreciate Tian’s power without being wholly dependent upon it. Tian, meanwhile, does not seem to require the eternal servitude of its people, but rather the well-being of all human beings. Tian may be held to be a god, but rather than a theistic god, it would seem to be veer more on the side of deistic. It is actively part of the relationship between Earth, human beings and itself, and invests them with virtue and uses jen to procreate, but it does not interact in the same way as the Judeo-Christian God. “Heaven is certainly omnipresent, may even be omniscient, but is most likely omnipotent. It needs our active participation to realize its own truth. We are Heaven’s partners, indeed cocreators. We serve Heaven with common sense, the lack of which nowadays has brought us to the brink of self-destruction. Since we help Heaven to realize itself through our own self-discovery and self-understanding in day-to-day living, the ultimate meaning of life is found in our own ordinary, human existence.”[vii] This is where the greatest divide between Christians and Confucians will lie. The issue of transcendence stands as one of the primary functions of a religion, and if we are to take Confucius’s philosophy as a religion for now, we will see a distinct difference: Christians see their transcendence as coming after this life through their salvation by God; Confucians see eternal life as a “this-wordly transcendentalism.”[viii]

The Will of God and The Tian Ming: Old Testament Prophets and Confucian Scholars

            Probably one of the most demonstrative signs of the Transcendent’s existence, to those who doubt it, is its ability to cause destruction or wreak vengeance. Both the Old Testament and Ancient China’s lavish history contain accounts of how failures and crimes of leaders have been punished directly by the Transcendent. In Christianity, the God of the Old Testament, Yahweh, rebuked numerous rulers and peoples for their sinful nature: “The Lord rained down burning sulphur on Sodom and Gomorrah – from the Lord out of the heavens. Thus he overthrew those cities and the entire plain, including all those living in the cities – and also the vegetation in the land.”[ix] “Babylon’s thick wall will be levelled and her high gates set on fire.”[x] “I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earth – men and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the air – for I am grieved that I have made them.”[xi] This is often the visible sign of The Will of God – or rather, these are the results of God’s Will being contravened. The Confucian concept of Tian Ming is best translated as ‘The Mandate of Heaven’. Its basic tenet is that anyone who rules over the min (the people) must be approved by Tian. If they in turn go against the Tian Ming, then Tian will remove the Mandate (geming) and a new dynasty or government be put in place. The chun-tzu is one who is aware of the Tian Ming, and acts as a scholar-official to the ruler to help him know what Tian expects. The withdrawal of the Tian Ming leads to a new government, and so for the Confucian, a ruler should follow the Tian Ming as best he can or face Tian’s retribution.

            Throughout Biblical times, the voice of God’s Will has come through the prophets – and in China’s history, there can be no doubt that Confucians have fulfilled this rôle also: “time and again…a ‘prophet’ would emerge who raised his voice of protest against misrule, directing his complaints to the ‘kings’ as did his Hebrew counterparts. Such a man would be a true follower of Confucius and Mencius. Such a man would speak in the name of Confucius, the sages, and of Heaven.”[xii] A prophet is, by some definitions, a proclaimer of the truth – and the ‘justice and righteousness’ words of the Old Testament prophets is very similar to the words of both Confucius and Mencius. William Theodore de Bary sees prophets like Hosea, Joel, Amos and Nahum with their condemnation of oppressive rule, as the sort of prophet that Confucians were to later become[xiii]. However, before we start to read patterns into this, we must understand the fundamental differences that separate Chinese and Semitic prophets.

            Firstly, there is a lack of any personal God in the Confucian tradition. Tian “does not speak”[xiv] and thus there are no conversations between Confucians and Heaven. The Hebrew prophets are often described as ‘wrestling with their God’ – but there is none of this in Confucianism. Secondly, Confucianism does not hold the min responsible for anything – the wrongs of the nation and the world are a result of its rulers, not the people themselves. The Old Testament prophets “challenge[d] the whole country: kings, priests, false prophets, and the entire nation”[xv] with no-one exempted from responsibility; for Confucians, this simply is not the case. Thirdly, whilst no fulfilment or reward beckons the Confucian prophet or his people, there is no judgement or damnation in store for them either – this comes only to the ruler, the ‘Son of Heaven’. Finally, unlike their Semitic opposite numbers, Confucian prophets rarely, if ever, had visions or ecstatic experiences prompting them to press ahead with their Heavenly commission – instead, they appeal to human experience. It is rather an inspired utterance of truth – not the voice of God speaking through them. That said, Tian still has a celestial order, constantly creating, directing, governing and punishing; and from time to time, genuine prophets with the ‘voice of Tian’ do appear, like Confucius himself.

            From a sociological perspective, according to John Sawyer, there was not a great social gap between Old Testament prophets and the political establishment, despite their emphatic refutation of it. Their protested independence from it cannot escape the fact that they were intrinsically part of Ancient Israel’s religious, political and educational heart.[xvi] Confucians too were very much part of the society of their time, but they did not feel the urge to distance themselves from it. Rather, they were tied to scholarship and schooling, public services and government. Their professional commitment to society differs from the Old Testament prophets – but at the same time, this tie does not overshadow their ability to turn against society if it began to disappoint them or violate the Tian Ming.

            Confucius and Mencius are also often seen as echoing Moses with their invocation of Tian in criticising the rulership of their day. Mencius himself once said “why should I stand in awe of princes?”[xvii] on discussing the matter of a ruler adhering the to counsel of his chun-tzu ministers. Prophets are usually men and women with a personal magnetism or charisma, but Julia Ching identifies education, merit and respect as strengths to make the Confucian voice heard above others. Their respect for the Son of Heaven extended only so far as he fulfilled his name – if he disobeyed Tian, then for Mencius, the min had a right to revolt against him. Hsun Tzu, a later Confucian, saw the ruler as a boat and the people as water – they may either sustain or overturn him. Tian makes the people and the rulers alike – but the ruler is checked by ministers and teachers. For Confucius, Tian would not “allow one man to preside over them in an arrogant and wilful manner, indulging his excesses and casting aside the nature of Heaven and Earth allotted [to him].”[xviii] Responsibility lay with the ruler for the min, and for the min to each other – the min could not be held responsible for matters of state and urgency. Furthermore, the min are not ‘responsible’ to Tian. One cannot cry out to Tian for the remedying of suffering or injustice – one must find one’s own transcendence, as we shall see.

            As regards the chun-tzu’s responsibility to the min, he is expected to manifest virtue that benefits others, cultivate rites for the respect of others, have a kindly manner when dealing with them and hold the confidence and trust of the people. They should aid the moral and social education of the people, “for, regardless of differences in education or social status, the people and their leaders shared the same basic moral sentiments and human needs.”[xix] That said, the chun-tzu was not on a mission from Yahweh to save the people from imminent destruction. There was no threat of Tian’s bringing down wrath upon them for not following its Mandate – rather, Confucians’ warnings were reserved only for the rulers of the time. The Emperor was the Son of Heaven, only in the sense of his being an intermediary. All human beings shared jen as “the common denominator among men”, and no human being could be above another in terms of value.

            From this, we see a Christian question – why did Confucianism, if so apparently concerned for the moral well-being of the min proclaim such things as the Emperor being the Son of Heaven? Naturally, it is a fair enough question – but then, Christianity is not devoid of such things itself. In St. Paul’s letter to the Romans, he says “everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgement on themselves.”[xx] This is open to interpretation – some might say that Paul means law is a direct derivation from Christian doctrine, and is thus God’s word enshrined. Yet, this is only interpretation – the words, as they stand, do not implicitly hint, but clearly state that God is the institutor of any government. Whatever we say on the matter can just as easily be transferred to Confucianism. When Confucius talks of Tian making rulers, and the Emperor being Tian’s ‘Son’, we are confronted with just the same problem – if we take both words at face value, then both traditions uphold order in the name of the Transcendent; if we interpret them both, then we get a picture of the authorities being descended from earlier religious doctrine, or else are symbolically held to account by the Transcendent. Either way, there is a direct parallel between the Will of God and the Tian Ming. In terms of relevance, the Confucian idea that Tian would not allow a ruthless ruler is helpful to Christians – there have been ruthless rulers in the past, but few last for long before being overthrown. Perhaps the Transcendent is indeed a checker on the governing authorities.

Tian, Jen and Transcendence

            Confucian scholar Tung Chung-shu associated jen with Tian and confirmed it as universal love. Since Tian was the creator, commander and governor of the universe, it seemed necessary that its spiritual force would be manifested in jen. Tian can sometimes be equated with jen – and in place of original sin, Confucians hold that mankind is born in ignorance of jen and Tian and thus needs to be ‘educated’ by a chun-tzu or a sage. In this section we will be examining precisely how it is that Confucianism, though a humanistic tradition, holds transcendence as the meaning of life, and how it attains to this plane of existence. The Christian, when considering Confucius’s philosophy, must be careful to not view it blinkered. It is not possible to liken the Kingdom of God to Tian. The Kingdom of God is the entire focus of a Christian life, and is separated from human existence – it can only be reached by salvation and the life after death. Yet, Tian is in accordance with life itself. Thus, when we speak of transcendence in Confucian terms, we do not necessarily mean a post-mortem existence, less so a Heavenly realm.

            Mencius, in defining jen, stated that it is within each and everyone of us, much like the Holy Spirit in Christianity. The importance lies, not in obtaining jen, but in using it effectively. As a cosmic principle (i.e. one that unites everything in the Universe) it is what allows us to become integrated with the cosmos – that is, reach the highest possible point of self-cultivation. From knowing jen, to performing jen to serving Tian – this is the process of transcendence in Confucianism. It starts and ends in humanity, motivated by the power of jen, which is itself rooted in humanity. By developing human nature to its utmost and involving all aspects of human life, one can then hope to reach transcendence. Christians, by contrast, see transcendence as flowing from the divine lifting human existence to a higher state, something attainable by faith in Christ, and not reliant upon human affairs. This difference is countered by the fact that both traditions see transcendence as unity with the Transcendent. Calvin says “Christ is not without us, but dwells within us; and not only adheres to us by an indissoluble connection of fellowship, but by a certain wonderful communion coalesces daily more and more into one body with us, till he becomes altogether one with us.”[xxi] Neo-Confucians, meanwhile, hold that transcendence is becoming one body with the Universe, so that transcendence is a progression from human existence to existence in unity with Tian.

            There also patterns to be seen in an overview of the way to transcendence. Confucians, aiming at becoming jen-JEN, seek to manifest virtues within themselves. These virtues cannot be manifested without a genuine and sincere love of others; with this will come the virtues, not only in oneself, but in others also – and this self-cultivation will eventually lead to jen, and thus integration. Christians have a faith in God, and by this faith, they love as God loves – not just God Himself, but all human beings. By doing this, they find rest in God’s grace, and the hope for salvation and transcendence. In both traditions, there is a very real sense of progression from one’s own actions to others, and from this to transcendence itself.

            Renewal is another corresponding feature to compare and contrast. Jen and agape, both as characters of a new world hold a progression from the present to the future – jen develops a new world from the old, and by agape, one must be “born again.”[xxii] The renewal is generated by the power of the Transcendent, be it Tian renewing the nation and the people, or Christ’s death for the forgiveness of sins. Confucians seek renewal by self-cultivation and continual renewal each day of their lives. Christians do not have this ongoing process, however – their renewal lies with God’s grace. Both understand the problem of the corruption of human nature, with the one seeing humans as innately good but perverted by un-jen desires, and the other as seeing human nature innately bad with a need to change it by faith. The mind-heart of jen and the atonement of Christ are both ways of linking human existence to the Transcendent, and in turn bringing about the process of transcendence itself.

The Sage and The Saint

            The highest form of existence one can take on in Confucius’s philosophy is that of a Sage. The Sage is one who has reached a pinnacle of excellence in his or her own self-cultivation, and as such it is virtually impossible to become one. Neo-Confucianism holds everyone as perfectible, and the innate ability to become a Sage exists in everyone – but even so, it is difficult to become one. Wang Yang-ming said that Sagehood is the natural human state, but that we are corrupted in life, and must reassert our ‘natural’ existence. In Christianity, those men and women to whom Christians attach the greatest significance are the Saints. These are people filled by the Holy Spirit, God having filled them with agape, and, “as a type of religious person, the Saint in Christianity suggest[s] characteristics of both ‘otherness’ or inimitability, associated with the veneration of the saint, and exemplariness or imitability, resulting in the emulation of the Saint by his followers.”[xxiii]

            The Sage is the “perfect embodiment of human relations”[xxiv], and is thus a perfected human being; the Saint, by contrast, is less high up on the spiritual ladder, since he or she acts on God’s Will – it is not the goal of a Christian to become a Saint, since only God decides upon who will become a Saint in the first instance. One may become a Sage by self-cultivation, with Tian playing only a limited rôle and “to be a Sage is the ultimate goal for Confucians”[xxv]; the Saint is determined by the Holy Spirit, and may not necessarily choose his or her vocation. There are less Sages than Saints, due to both the difficulty in becoming one and the lack of recognition self-inherent in the Confucian tradition;[xxvi] ironically, there are more Saints, because it is God’s volition that decides upon them, and they are enlightened by the Spirit (e.g. Paul on the road to Damascus) rather than by themselves.

            Thus, in the Saint and Sage comparison, we see two sets of people who, whilst both being wholly virtuous and the best of mankind, are divided by their way to their position. The Sage became as such by his or her own self-cultivation and dedication to jen; the Saint, by contrast, was made virtuous by God, and became God’s person, a servant to God’s love. For a Christian, the goal of Sagehood would be just as testing as it is for the Confucian – but in the Christian faith, there is not ‘personality goal’, as God decides who his chosen people will be. In terms of relevance, we might almost posit that the character of Confucian sage is a useful one to bear in mind when dealing with others. One need not necessarily have to be Confucian to appreciate and learn from the benevolent examples of Confucian Sages.

The Problem of Life After Death?

            There can be no doubt that in both traditions, the ultimate goal is transcendence. Whether it is a case of personal achievement by self-cultivation and aspirations to Sagehood, or the dedication to agape and a life revolving around God, both Confucians and Christians alike seek meaning in their lives. But life is limited – at some time in life, one must consider what will occur afterwards. For Christians, this poses a problem, not so much in understanding, but in faith. The Bible speaks of a glorious eternal life with God, after judgement for how our life was spent, and the “spiritual body” concept of St. Paul, but there must be genuine belief to sustain this ideal. Christians are also dogged by problems of how the afterlife will consist, and if there can be any evidence for it in this life. Yet, for the Confucian, this problem simply does not exist. Eternity, as a concept, is to be found within human life, not external to it, according to Confucius. The ‘problems’ are eliminated by the very fact that Confucians are not concerned by what happens when they die. They see life’s meaning in life itself, not what happens afterwards. This is why life is so cherished by Confucians. Christians search for their meaning in an afterlife with God, but it is the simple joys of life and the Confucian ethic that gives Confucians their meaning of life. What occurs after we die is of little interest to them – we should spend this life doing all that we can to help others and cultivate jen instead of wasting it worrying about what will happen after it.

            What relevance there is in this philosophy of life may seem difficult to find at first. Yet, the point being made, whether or not religiously correlative, is important. Christians should indeed concern themselves with the present rather than the life to come. For the millions of people who are not Christians, but are in need just as much as the next person, the enigma for life after death is not important to them – they need help here and now, and that should be of primary concern for Christians. One does not need to follow entirely the Confucian Tao to appreciate some of its philosophical points about life (rather than afterlife). We can also see from this chapter that Confucians, like Christians, see a Being above themselves – and to this Being they show the utmost reverence. They carry out its Mandate as best they can, and they seek unity with it in their lives by self-cultivation. Christians see a Being greater than themselves, like Confucians, and that Being they give the utmost love and praise to. They carry out its Will in their lives, and they seek to become one body with it by loving as it itself loves. We see now how transcendence between these two traditions is not so aberrant as first it might have appeared. As to relevance, as we have explored already, Confucius’s philosophy as one of life gives Christians a number of aids in carrying out their lives now. Confucius would not have wanted Christians to abandon their faith in God – but he would have liked to see them cherish their life here and now more than perhaps at times they appear to. A deep yearning for what comes after this life will ipso facto devalue this life itself. By learning to appreciate one’s own human life and the lives of others, one can learnt to love God all the more, and implicitly have a deeper hope for salvation.