Abstract
China, for nearly a millennium and a half, has largely viewed Christianity as a foreign religion for a foreign people. When Christians from the Church of the East (or “Nestorianism,” as it is commonly known)1 first traveled the Silk Road around the year 630, their faith intrigued the emperor but saw few converts. Centuries later, Catholic and Protestant missionaries evangelized with their cultures as much as with their faiths. Even when Eastern Orthodoxy first entered China in the seventeenth century, it was in the form of a diplomatic exchange with Russia to establish a ministry mainly toward Russian expatriates.2 As a consequence, for most of Christianity’s history in China, few Chinese converts have been interested in establishing an indigenous church. Even fewer would have a desire to pursue what the missiologist David Bosch calls “self-theologizing”—the task of constructing a local theology.3 However, this would change significantly by the beginning of the twentieth century.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
In Chinese, this group is often known by the term jingjiao—the “luminous religion.” In English it is still common to refer to the group as “Nestorian” or the “Nestorian Church,” named after Nestorius, the Archbishop of Constantinople, who was condemned at the Third Ecumenical Council held in Ephesus in AD 431. This usage can be seen in the history written recently by the respected historian Daniel Bays, A New History of Christianity in China (New York: Wiley and Blackwell, 2011), 4–16.
There has arisen, however, some critique to the appropriateness of this term. Sebastian Brock argues that the so-called Nestorian Church has, in antiquity, preferred to self-describe itself as the “Church of the East”—a term I employ in this present study. He rightly states, “The association between the Church of the East and Nestorius is of a very tenuous nature, and to continue to call that church ‘Nestorian’ is, from a historical point of view, totally misleading and incorrect.” Sebastian P. Brock, “The ‘Nestorian’ Church: A Lamentable Misnomer,” Bulletin of John Rylands Library 78, no. 3 (1996): 35.
Peter Hofrichter goes on to argue that parts of the so-called Nestorian documents of China tend toward a position closer to Monophysitism—a theological position quite opposite the teachings associated by Nestorius but likewise anathematized by the Fourth Ecumenical Council held in Chalcedon in AD 451. This makes the description of this group as “Nestorian” even more precarious. Peter L. Hofrichter, preface to Jingjiao: The Church of the East in China and Central Asia, ed. Roman Malek and Peter L. Hofrichter (Sankt Augustin, Germany: Institut Monumenta Serica, 2006).
Eric Widmer, The Russian Ecclesiastical Mission in Peking during the Eighteenth Century (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1976).
David J. Bosch, Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1997), 450–452.
He Ganzhi, Jindai Zhongguo qimeng yundong shi [The History of the Chinese Enlightenment Movement] (Shanghai: Shenghuo shudian [Life Books], 1937).
Vera Schwarcz, The Chinese Enlightenment: Intellectuals and the Legacy of the May Fourth Movement of 1919 (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1986).
Confucianism is sometimes described as having three epochs: classic Confucianism coming from the writings of Confucius and Mengzi; Neo-Confucianism of the Song and Ming dynasties; and New Confucianism of the twentieth century. For a detailed description, see Tu Wei-ming, “Toward a Third Epoch of Confucian Humanism: A Background Understanding,” in Confucianism: The Dynamics of Tradition, ed. Irene Eber (New York: Macmillan, 1986), 3–21, and Liu Shuxian, Lun rujia zhexue de san ge da shidai [On the Three Great Epochs of Confucian Philosophy] (Hong Kong: Zhongwen Daxue Chubanshe [The Chinese University Press], 2008). For a less sympathetic perspective of the three-epoch paradigm, see John Makeham, ed., New Confucianism: A Critical Examination (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003). While it is widely debated whether or not Confucianism can be considered a proper religion, it is not the purpose of this study to enter into that discussion.
Chen Tu-hsiu (Chen Duxiu), “Christianity and Chinese People,” trans. Y. Y. Tsu, The Chinese Recorder 51, no. 7 (July 1920): 454.
Xu Jilin, “The Fate of an Enlightenment: Twenty Years in the Chinese Intellectual Sphere (1978–1998),” trans. Geremie R. Barné and Gloria Davies, in Chinese Intellectuals Between State and Market, ed. Edward Gu and Merle Goldman (London: Routledge, [1998] 2004), 183–203.
Edmond Tang, “The Second Chinese Enlightenment: Intellectuals and Christianity Today,” in Identity and Marginality: Rethinking Christianity in North East Asia, ed. Werner Ustorfand Toshiko Murayama (Frankfurt am Main; New York: Peter Lang, 2000), 55–70.
Much has been written on the terms “indigenization,” “inculturation” and “contextualization.” Within Protestantism, much of what is understood as “indigenization” comes from the so-called three-self principles of Henry Venn (1796–1873 ) and Rufus Anderson (1796— 1880), who argued for the development of a self-supporting, self-governing and self-propagating local church. “Inculturation,” a term used mainly within Catholic circles, involves a dual process of transforming a local culture with the gospel and enriching the gospel by new understandings from the culture. While inclusive of both these ideas, “contextualization” tries to provide theological answers to social, political and economic questions and tends to address the needs of a particular historical moment. Theological Education Fund, Ministry in Context: The Third Mandate Programme of the Theological Education Fund (1970–77) (Bromley, UK: Theological Education Fund, 1972). Shoki Coe, “Contextualizing Theology,” in Mission Trends No. 3: Third World Theologies, ed. Gerald H. Anderson and Thomas F. Stransky (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1976), 19–24.
Ruy O. Costa, ed., One Faith, Many Cultures: Inculturation, Indigenization, and Contextualization (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1988). Bosch, Transforming Mission, 420–432;
Stephen B. Bevans, Models of Contextual Theology, rev. ed. (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2002), 26–27.
Wang Mingdao, “We, Because of Faith,” in Documents of the Three-Self Movement: Source Materials for the Study of the Protestant Church in Communist China, ed. Wallace C. Merwin and Francis P. Jones (New York, NY: National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA, [1955] 1963), 99–106.
Gustaf Aulén, Christus Victor: An Historical Study of the Three Main Types of the Idea of Atonement (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2003).
K. H. Ting, “Truth and Slander,” in No Longer Strangers: Selected Writings of K. H. Ting, ed. Raymond L. Whitehead (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, [1955] 1989), 141–142, 145.
Pei-jung Fu, “The Concept of ‘T’ien’ in Ancient China: With Special Emphasis on Confucianism” (PhD diss., Yale University, 1984), 53–64.
Ralph R. Covell, Confucius, The Buddha, and Christ: A History of the Gospel in Chinese (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1986), 182–205.
Julia Ching, Chinese Religions (London: Macmillan Press, 1993), 2.
Justo L. González, Christian ThoughtRevisited: Three Types of Theology (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1999).
Stephen B. Bevans and Roger P. Schroeder, Constants in Context: A Theology of Mission for Today (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2004).
Dorothee Sölle, Thinking About God: An Introduction to Theology (London: SCM, 1990).
Michael Nai Chiu Poon, “A Review from Asia,” Mission Studies 22, no. 1 (2005): 139–144.
Ching, Chinese Religions, 7–8. This sentiment is similarly echoed by Wing-tsit Chan who points out that Chinese thought seems to be at odds with an Augustinian view of original sin. See Wing-tsit Chan, Religious Trends in Modern China (New York, NY: Columbia University Press, 1953), 175.
Robert C. Neville, Boston Confucianism: Portable Tradition in the Late-Modern World (Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 2000), 164.
Lai Pan-chiu (Lai Pinchao), “Christian-Confucian Dialogue on Humanity: An Ecological Perspective,” Studies in Interreligious Dialogue 14 (2004): 211. Lai Pan-chiu has also discussed the significance of Orthodox thought in engaging New Confucianism and in developing SinoChristian Theology. Furthermore, Lai’s former doctoral student, So Yuen-tai (Su Yuantai), has written about using theosis as an interprefive motif for the thoughts of Xu Songshi (1900–1999) and Zhang Chunyi (1871–1955), both of whom sought to integrate Christian theology with Mahāyāna Buddhism. Lai Pan-chiu, “Chaoyue zhe de neizai xing yu neizai zhe de chaoyue xing: Ping Mou Zongsan dui ru ye zhi fenpan” [Immanence of the Transcendent and the Transcendence of the Immanent: On Mou Zongsan’s Differentiation of Christianity and Confucianism], in Dangdai ruxue yu xifang wenhua: Zongjiao pian [Modern Confucianism and Western Culture: Religious Perspective], ed. Liu Shu-hsien (Liu Shuxian) and Lin Yueh-hui (Lin Yuehui) (Taipei: Zhongyang yan jiu yuan Zhongguo wen zhe yanjiu suo [Institute of Chinese Literature and Philosophy, Academia Sinica], 2005), 43–89.
Lai Pan-chiu, “Jidu Zhengjiao zhi Shenxue fuxing jiqi dui Hanyu Shenxue de yiyi” [Renaissance of Orthodox Theology and its Significance for Sino-Christian Theology], Logos and Pneuma 32 (Spring 2010): 247–272.
So Yuen-tai, “Ren keyi cheng Shen? Shilun Jidu Zongjiao yiyi xia de cheng Shen guan” [Can Human (sic) Become God? On Christian Deification], Logos and Pneuma 22 (Spring 2005): 201–229.
Aloysius Pieris, “Towards an Asian Theology of Liberation,” in An Asian Theology of Liberation (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1988), 71–74.
Pope Benedict XVI has once stated that certain forms of liberation theology were invented by intellectuals born or educated in the “rich West.” So, arguably, even Latin American liberation theology is born from another “Western” context. Joseph Ratzinger and Victorio Messori, The Ratzinger Report: An Exclusive Interview on the State of the Church (San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 1985), 186.
Copyright information
© 2013 Alexander Chow
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Chow, A. (2013). Introduction. In: Theosis, Sino-Christian Theology and the Second Chinese Enlightenment. Palgrave Macmillan’s Christianities of the World. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137312624_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137312624_1
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-45734-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-31262-4
eBook Packages: Palgrave Religion & Philosophy CollectionPhilosophy and Religion (R0)