The Fountainhead of Chinese-Language Christian Theology: Matteo Ricci’s “Doctrine of the Sovereign of Heaven” and Proof for the Existence of God

Abstract

Concerning the “Debate on the Translation of Names,” previous scholarly attention has been focused mostly on differences between the stances of Matteo Ricci and Nicolò Longobardo’s “factions,” while more recent research has gradually begun to analyze the significance of Longobardo’s activities and writings. In keeping with the spate of new scholarly interpretations of this topic, the present study offers an examination of the “Doctrine of the Sovereign of Heaven” from a new angle, in hopes of gaining new insights. It assumes that this doctrine was not just an innovation related to the strategies and challenges of theological localization, but rather represents a proof for the existence of God that is permeated by the two great explanatory traditions of Confucian classical learning and Christian theology. From Ricci’s perspective, the true recognition of God on the part of the ancient Chinese derived from “natural law,” a view whose fundamental character lie in its use of natural theology and historical framing to construct a theory of God for the late Ming dynasty. Only the “Doctrine of the Sovereign of Heaven” could prove that the “Lord of Heaven” from the West and the “Sovereign-on-High” of the East were concepts “identical in essence yet different in form” at the root of all civilization. On both the psychological and social levels, this could allow Confucian Christians to carefully avoid a self-defeating “double-headed snake” type of conflict and contradiction, thus permitting the Chinese literati to come to Jesus through Confucianism and ultimately attain the ideal fusion of Confucianism and Christianity for the sake of integrating self and society. Seen from this perspective, the “Doctrine of the Sovereign of Heaven” undoubtedly raises questions about verifying the existence of the supreme god of Catholicism, representing the very origin of Chinese-language Christian theology and therefore should not be treated merely as a theoretical outcome of the debate about the translation of names.