Matteo Ricci and the New Horizon of the Intellectual World in late Ming: A Response to Prof. XIE Wenyu’s Article “The True Meaning of the Lord of Heaven and the Differences in Concerns between Chinese and Western Thinking”

Abstract

With the publication and circulation of The True Meaning of the Lord of Heaven by Matteo Ricci (1552-1610) since the late Ming Dynasty, related criticisms abound. On the whole, the accusations against this book are no more than three: invoking backward medieval theosophy and science, misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the indigenous Confucianism, Buddhism, and Taoism, and a missionary hermeneutics in the style of "for my own use". This article is a response to Prof. XIE Wenyu's article on The True Meaning of the Lord of Heaven. The article responds to each of the points in Prof. Xie Wenyu's article from ten aspects. The article argues that Matteo Ricci and The True Meaning of the Lord of Heaven played a positive role in the cultural exchanges between China and the West and the development of Confucianism in the late Ming Dynasty. If this role is not considered to be significant, the reason lies not in Matteo Ricci himself, but in Confucianism itself.