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