Post on 25-Jan-2016
description
Transmitting Christian messages across cultural borders: a task for future Patristic syntheses?
Cyril Hovorun
When I was approached to prepare a paper for this conference, a couple of
weeks ago, Fr Lawrence Cross suggested a number of keywords that would
fit the theme of our venue here. Among them were words ‘East’, ‘West’,
‘context’, ‘nature’. I was fascinated by this selection. They perfectly matched
what I was thinking of for quite a long time. This probably helped me to
prepare my paper quickly. The only keywords, which were missing for me
among those suggested by Fr Lawrence, were ‘Asia’ and ‘China’.
Two years ago I had a chance to lecture at a dozen of universities in
Mainland China, mostly in Beijing. My audience consisted of postgraduate
students and professors of religious studies. Religious studies in China, on
the one hand, are defined narrowly. They are supposed to be cultural and
comparative. On the other hand, they in effect appear to be comprehensive
enough to include theology and religious philosophy, even though almost
unofficially. It reminded me of the Soviet era when those who wanted to
study Christianity, including Theology or Metaphysics, had to do this in the
framework of the ‘scientific atheism’. I do not mean to make a comparison
between the Soviet Union and modern China; they are different. I just want
to say that many people in China, who are in the religious studies, often go
beyond mere comparativism. Through talks with those people many of who
are highly motivated to learn more about Christianity, I learned a number
of things, which I would like to share with you here.
1
Post-secularism in China
During last year I had a chance to speak at a couple of conferences about
post-secularism. It seems that it is appropriate to touch on this issue at this
conference as well. This is because, I think, it is unavoidable to touch on the
issue of Post-secularism when we speak of the religious situation in China.
China is post-secular. It is post-secular in its own way. Before we can speak
about the Chinese way of living post-secular, we should say a few words
about post-secular in general.
Post-secularism can be approached from different prospects: sociological,
political, philosophical, theological and other. Many different things are
implied by it. Post-secularism can mean, for instance, that religion is
allowed back to the public life in the societies where it was marginalised
and forced to the private life of individuals. It can also mean a growing
interest in religion as a social and even political phenomenon. Some can
regard Post-secularism as an alarming growth of clericalism. Some, on the
contrary, as a blessed renaissance of spirituality. For some, an ultimate
manifestation of Post-secularism is a phenomenal global success of
Christian Charismatic movements. For others, it is about rediscovering
nation’s identities and roots. For some, Post-secularism is associated with
Islamic fundamentalism. For some, it accompanies major political and
ideological trends, like Neo-conservatism or Post-liberalism. Post-
secularism is global. It covers the entire planet from the US to China and
includes, for instance, Russia with its hypothetical ‘symphony’ of the
Church and the state, Middle East with its ‘Arab springs’, Europe with its
Multiculturalism etc.
In China, Post-secularism can be associated with one of the highest in the
history of Christianity rates of growth of the Christian community. It also
2
manifests itself in a wide range of forms of Christianity, from a liberation
movement among peasants converted to Charismatism, to the ‘cultural
Christianity’ studied in the Universities. Traditional religions like Taoism,
Confucianism and Buddhism also regain more and more ground in the
country’s public life.
In response to these developments, the policy of the modern Chinese state
concerning religion, both Chinese and Christian, dramatically changed
during last decade. As regards Christianity, the Chinese state nowadays is
interested in developing it. It invests big money into building seminaries
and churches, in training pastors and professors of theology. At the same
time, it cares that Christianity develops under its full control. I heard an
interesting idea that the Chinese state is afraid of the scenario that took
place in the late Roman Empire, where, as they understand it, uncontrolled
growth of Christianity led to eventual collapse of the state. Chinese state
cannot and does not want to extinguish or suppress Christianity. It wants
Christianity to grow under its complete control.
The state does not only secure that religious communities in China have
enough space for their development. It also cares about the ideas that
circulate in that space. There is a following tendency, which I would regard
a token of Post-secularism. From my talks with the students and professors
at the Chinese universities, I concluded that scholars in theology and
religious studies are encouraged to pay more attention to what can be
called traditional Chinese spirituality. At the core of this spirituality are
figures like Confucius. In recent years, Confucius turned into a figure
insistently propagated among the Chinese. New shelves with books of and
on Confucius and other traditional Chinese spiritual authorities were
installed in the bookshops widely throughout the country. Statues of
3
Confucius were placed on the campuses of many Universities, including
conservative ones like, for instance, Tsinghua University in Beijing. (SLIDE)
I do not want to say that this kind of encouragement and propaganda is
something bad. I just want say that it is important to have this tendency in
mind when we want to find most appropriate ways to communicate
Christianity to China.
The ways of emancipating Christianity in Asia
The growing self-awareness of the Chinese, and not only them, but Asians
in general, an elevated esteem about their economy, and as follows, about
their countries, culture and themselves, echo in the way they prefer to
receive Christianity nowadays. They want Christianity to be more
accommodated to their region. May be more than even some years ago.
Therefore, a major quest for the Christian mission and Christian theology in
Asia nowadays is about accommodating Christianity to the local situation.
Accommodation has a wide variety of forms, including enculturation,
contextualisation, emancipation etc. These forms may look similar. In effect,
however, they are quite different and we should distinguish between them.
In my opinion, emancipation of Christianity is more than enculturation and
contextualisation. Although it includes translation of Christianity into
native cultures, it goes further.
Translating Christianity into the Asian culture became important from the
very beginning of the Christian mission there. One of the first western
missionaries to China, Jesuit Matteo Ricci (1552-1610), is remembered for
a remarkable success of his integration to the Chinese context, both
political and cultural. (SLIDE) He introduced the Chinese to the western
4
mapmaking, astronomy, mathematics, music, and theology. The latter he
attempted to express in terms of Confucianism. He thus initiated a trend of
contextualisation in the western mission. After him and largely owing to
him, this trend gradually turned to a mainstream method of preaching
Gospel in Asia. When speaking of contextualisation of Christianity
nowadays, I always have in front of my eyes an example of a beautiful
compound of Tao Fong Shan at Sha Tin in Hong Kong, which hosts the
Institute of Sino-Christian Studies and Lutheran Theological Seminary.
(SLIDE) It is located next to the monastery of Ten Thousand Buddhas (Man
Fat Tsze). The Christian church and buildings of the compound are similar
to those at the nearby Buddhist monastery. At the same time, they host a
prominent centre of Christian mission for the entire region of South-East
Asia. For me, this is a brilliant example of successful contextualisation.
(SLIDE) There are many compounds like Tao Fong Shan established
throughout the region in the 20th century, and all of them testify that the
idea of contextualisation won in China.
However successful might have been contextualisation of Christianity in
Asia, emancipation or appropriation is about making a step further. It is
about communicating Christianity in a way of dynamic interaction. This is
when Christianity is not just delivered in forms of a local culture, but it is
also received and appropriated. This is when Christianity becomes dear and
‘domesticated’, a home for people. This is an appropriation of Christianity
through dialogue, an honest and serious interaction. The Theory of
Communicative Action by Jürgen Habermas can probably say more about
this way of bringing Christian message to the Asian context. His Theory also
speaks of emancipation, which, I believe, is an urgent task for the Church
nowadays. Church has to make itself communicable to other cultures
through dynamic interaction.
5
Emancipation of the Church is also among the priorities of the modern
ecclesiology. In this regard, I would like to mention a recent research by a
Swedish scholar Michael Hjälm, ‘Liberation of the Ecclesia’, which opened
this fascinating discussion. Thus, ecclesiological research in emancipation
theories can and should have immediate application in Asia.
Demand for emancipation of the Christian message, I believe, is a follow-up
of post-secularity. Christianity is not anymore a private affair, not even an
affair for small communities. It is a public issue. And as such, it requires
emancipation, to counter-balance its publicity. When Christianity becomes
public, it simultaneously needs a more personal appropriation. Otherwise it
turns into a political or ideological phenomenon. It may thus represent
culture, or civilisation, or political agendas, but not Christ himself. In other
words, Christianity in post-secular context, like the Chinese one, without
emancipation faces a danger of turning into an instrument of politics or
culture.
Eastern Christianity in Asia
Among the things that can help emancipating Christianity in the Asian
context, is to make it eastern. Or, to bring to Asia Christianity which is
already eastern! When I talked to Chinese about Christianity they
responded that they would like their Christianity to be eastern. And they
showed a good deal of interest in the traditional eastern forms of
Christianity, including Orthodoxy. The Chinese have learned to distinguish
between western and eastern Christianity. At the same time, they know
much more about the western Christianity. However, they want to learn
more about the eastern Christianity, and have an a priori sympathy to it.
6
There are a number of reasons why eastern Christianity can be easily, in
my view, appropriated in China. One reason is historical. Under the dynasty
of Tang (618 – 907) Christianity was introduced to China in its ‘Nestorian’
form. In 635, as it is known from sources, Emperor Taizong granted
‘Nestorian’ missionaries permission to preach on the Chinese soil. (SLIDE)
Soon after that, in 638, according to historical records, a certain Olopen
built the first ‘Nestorian’ church, Da Qin temple, in Xi’an, a capital of China
at that time. Later on, Olopen was granted by the Emperor Gaozhong a title
‘National priest’. A century later, the eastern Syrian Patriarch appointed a
metropolitan for China. Chinese records testify that at around 790 there
was a metropolitan at the city of Siangfu and six bishops under his
jurisdiction. By the 11th century, there were at least four dioceses in China
and Mongolia. (SLIDE)
We should not understand the ‘Nestorian’ character of the Chinese
Christianity mistakenly. I put the term ‘Nestorian’ in quotes marks, as it can
be applied to many different things. ‘Nestorian’ can be called Biblical
hermeneutics of Diodorus of Tarsus (c. 330 – c. 390), Christology of
Theodore of Mopsuestia (ca. 350 – 428), or aggressive Church policies of
Nestorius the Archbishop of Constantinople (c. 386 – c. 451). As ‘Nestorian’
a Christian community in the Persian Empire was historically identified,
though this identification is not always correct. Persian authorities
imposed a distinct ‘Nestorian’ identity on the Christian community of their
Empire, in contrast to the religious identity of its rival, Byzantium.
‘Nestorian’ identity in the Persian context, therefore, was more political
than confessional. Persian ‘Nestorians’ were not necessary Nestorians or, to
put it more correctly, followers of Christology of Theodore of Mopsuestia.
Therefore, we should be careful when we read in the historical sources
about ‘Nestorians’ in China. They might be simply Christians from Persia.
7
Their confessional identity could be either ‘Nestorian’ or ‘Byzantine’. In the
meantime, there are also records about Byzantines in China. The sources
report about at least four Byzantine embassies to China in the period
between 640 and 750.
All this happened long before the first western missionaries came to China.
It also happened simultaneously with the wide reception of Buddhism in
China, which took place under the dynasty of Tang. It also coincided
chronically with revivals of neo-Confucianism. Eastern Christianity may
belong to the deep past of China, but for the Chinese this matters a lot.
References to the ‘Nestorian’ past of China, which happened to be
contemporary to the spread of Buddhism and the renaissance of
Confucianism, may help bringing eastern Christianity back to the Chinese
soil. It is an important factor for reception of Christianity, in its eastern
form, in modern China.
Bringing eastern Christianity to China does not mean that any further
emancipation is not needed. Christianity in its eastern form should be
accommodated to China, as it actually was when it appeared in China for
the first time. Indeed, eastern Christianity from the very beginning of its
history in China reflected local traditions. A Christian monument excavated
recently in Luoyang, a city in central China, can testify this. (SLIDE) The
monument dates back to the year 829 (Tang dynasty). It is a pillar placed
aside a grave. Such pillars were traditional for Buddhist burial places. This
one was Christian installed in imitation to Buddhist ‘dharani’ pillars. It has
a variation of traditional Buddhist texts carved on it, presenting thus an
excellent example of how the early eastern Christianity tried to
accommodate itself to the local context.
8
A key notion in dealing with Post-secularism in China – nature
From my conversations with the students and teachers of religious studies
in China, I concluded that they are concerned about the issue of nature.
When speaking of nature, I mean all created world, with human nature in
its centre. Indeed, this issue is important, on the one hand, from the point of
view of traditional Chinese perception of the world. On the other hand,
there is a radical difference between the western and the eastern Christian
perceptions of the nature.
When western missionaries come to China, they bring one or another
edition of the Augustinian hermeneutics of nature. This hermeneutics, as it
is known, is pessimistic. It implies that sin has distorted the nature down to
its very roots. The nature has become different from what it was before the
Fall. In its current situation, it is corrupted and alienated from its initial
goodness. This western picture clashes with the traditional Chinese
perception of nature, which is rather optimistic.
For the eastern Christian theology, human nature after the Fall remains the
same and identical to itself before the Fall. Any change of the human nature
as such under the influence of sin would mean for the eastern Fathers that
humans ceased to be humans and turned into creatures of some other kind.
It is through the mind and will that sin gets access to the human beings, not
through the nature per se. As Maximus the Confessor (580 – 662) put it
(SLIDE):
If Adam ate willingly, then the will is the first thing in us that
became subject to passion. And since the will is the first thing in us
that became subject to passion, if <…> the Logos did not assume it
9
along with the nature when he became incarnate, I have not
become free from sin (Disputatio 325a).
For the eastern Fathers, human nature is corrupted and subject to sin, as
well as for the West. However, unlike for the western theologians, the
mechanism of impact of sin on the nature, for the easterners, is more
complex. Sin is not a part of the human nature. It exercises its impact on
man through decisions and acts of will. That is why Patriarch Photius of
Constantinople, for instance, regarded as heresy the western idea of ‘sin of
nature’ (Library, 177). Thus, the eastern outlook on the nature is more
optimistic and more in tune with the traditional Chinese views. It provides
a good illustration of how Christianity can be easier communicated to the
Chinese context, when it is presented in its eastern form. Thus, as it was
stated earlier, traditional theological insights of the Christian East can
facilitate the task of appropriation and emancipation of Christianity in
China.
Asia – an ideal platform for Patristic studies in future?
Asia can help the Patristic studies in return. You will be surprised, how? I
will try to explain. I believe that one of the tasks for studies of the Fathers
in future will be transcending the traditional Greco-Roman and Semitic (in
case of the Syrian Fathers) matrix of thinking. Patristic studies at the
current stage, have accumulated practically exhausting knowledge about
thought of the Fathers, their texts, pre- and con-texts. But they remain a
closed system of knowledge, which practically does not exceed itself. This
has also become a feature of the Neo-Patristic synthesis, a method
introduced by Fr George Florovsky, which dominated in the Patristic
10
Studies for almost a century. Despite its ambition to be a ‘synthesis’, it did
not manage to communicate with the knowledge beyond itself. Therefore,
‘Neo-Patristic synthesis’ turned to be just partially a synthesis. It never left
the system of coordinates, in which it developed. Its most ambition was to
interpret the ‘old’ tradition in terms of ‘new’ traditions, where ‘new’ is just
a continuation of the ‘old’. Because of this, it is not a surprise, for instance,
that Fr George Florovsky insisted on Hellenism as an essential framework
for his Neo-Patristic synthesis, which, thus, can be called ‘synthesis’ quite
conditionally.
There can be a more radical synthesis, or even several syntheses, which
would exceed the boundaries of the Greco-Roman mind-set. They can be
syntheses of the traditional Christian Patristic thought with Asian cultures.
Chinese culture and philosophy should be among priorities for such kind of
syntheses.
To accomplish such a task, it is essential, I believe, to make a clear
distinction between a message, which we want to transmit into another
culture, and the language in which the message can be vested. For a
successful transmission of Christianity to the Chinese soil, a new
theological language should be elaborated. This language will consist not
only of theological terms, but also of notions, philosophical constructions,
aesthetical manifestations and other means of communication. It is an
ambitious and yet extremely difficult task. It can be seen in one line with
the tasks like embodying Christian message in the philosophical language
of Neo-Platonism or constructing Christian theology from the Aristotelian
categories. It is an ambitious task; this is true. Yet, it is not unachievable.
Through this task, Christianity can be communicated to the Asian context
and emancipated by it in a more appropriate way. It will also enrich
11
traditional Christian theology, including Patristic studies. After all, our
capacity to deal with this task, not necessary to solve it, will mean that for
us, theology is a living reality, and not just a sum of knowledge. It will mean
that we do not pass theology to further generations like bricks, but try to
grow it like a tree.
12