Contemplation and Action in Confucian-Christian Dialogue: Aloysius Chang's Chinese Catholic Adaptation of Neo-Confucian "Quiet-Sitting" (Jingzuo 靜坐)

Abstract

In broad terms, this dissertation calls for more constructive engagement between the field of Confucian-Christian comparison and the study of Chinese Christian theologies articulated in Confucian terms, arguing that the latter have important insights to offer the former. More specifically, it explores the groundbreaking work of Aloysius Chang Chun-shen (Zhang Chunshen 張春申, 1929-2015), an influential yet understudied Chinese Jesuit who developed a form of Christian spirituality inspired by the Neo-Confucian practice of “quiet-sitting” (jingzuo 静坐). From a strictly historical perspective, Chang’s positive evaluation of Neo-Confucianism as a spiritual resource for Chinese Christians is significant in its departure from earlier, more critical approaches to the tradition by Catholic missionaries, typified by that of Chang’s prominent successor in the Jesuit mission, Matteo Ricci (1552-1610). This alone makes Chang’s work worthy of extended study. From a comparative perspective, however, equally significant is Chang’s view of the convergence between Catholic and Neo-Confucian perspectives regarding the dynamic relationship between contemplation and action—a perennial locus in both traditions, yet one which has figured little in comparisons between the two. With this in view, the first half of the study sets necessary foundations, including by outlining major ways the contemplation-action relation has figured in the Catholic, and especially Ignatian, tradition of which Chang was an inheritor; by introducing quiet-sitting and its connection to comparable concerns within Neo-Confucianism; and then by situating this dissertation’s focus within the broader field of Confucian-Christian comparison. The second half turns to Chang, first situating his theological program against the backdrop of Catholic-Confucian encounter in Chinese history, and then providing a close analysis of his proposal for Chinese Christian quiet-sitting. In doing so, a number of Neo-Confucian-inspired elements are highlighted, including Chang’s appeal to what he calls the “category of unity” (yiti fanchou 一體範疇) and his treatment of the classic Great Learning (Daxue 大學) as a practical model for Christian quiet-sitting. Most importantly, however, Chang is shown to develop these elements in a way that manifests striking points of convergence between Catholic and Neo-Confucian perspectives on the contemplation-action relationship—points ranging from metaphysical foundations to hermeneutical, procedural, and moral considerations. Finally, the implications of Chang’s insights are drawn out by treating the prominent Neo-Confucian Zhu Xi 朱熹 (1130-1200) as a comparand, thereby demonstrating how Chang’s perspectives not only prompt new lines of inquiry vis-à-vis Zhu’s quiet-sitting, but also enrich and challenge a number of recent comparisons between Zhu and other Christian figures or contemplative practices. Most significantly, the comparative insights undergirding Chang’s proposal are found to challenge certain points of contention that have loomed large in Confucian-Christian comparison, with the most problematic being a persistent dichotomy between “transcendence” and “immanence.” Put simply, Chang’s insights regarding the two traditions’ convergent perspectives on the relationship between contemplation and action—and especially on the metaphysical foundations of this relationship—not only show such a dichotomy to be insufficient to the task of sensitive comparison, but also reveal more compelling points for comparative conversation. In this way, the study positions Chang’s Chinese Christian quiet-sitting as an invaluable resource for the dialogue between Christianity and Confucianism.