CHAPTER 3 The 1670 Chinese : A Struggle for Indigenization Amidst the Chinese Rites Controversy1

Audrey Seah

The Chinese Roman missal of 1670 is the first Tridentine to be translated from into a foreign language; however, this Chinese missal was never authorized for use.2 Why was this so, and what then, was its role in the broader history of the Church in China? Several scholars have discussed the Chinese liturgy in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries in relation to the es- tablishment of native to which it is closely related.3 Here I approach the topic from a different angle, that of the historical context of the Chinese Rites Controversy and the text of the Chinese missal. By doing so, I hope to illumi- nate important aspects of the missal’s history that have not yet been examined. In this essay, I chronologically examine the development of the Chinese lit- urgy within the context of the Chinese Church’s predominant historical narra- tive, that is, how the foundation of the Church in China that Matteo Ricci, SJ, (1552–1610) built by assimilating himself into Chinese culture was gradually un- done by the Chinese Rites Controversy. Given the impracticality of summariz-

1 I am indebted to the Ricci Institute for Chinese-Western Cultural History at the University of San Francisco for the award of a travel grant and access to their resources, without which this research would not have been possible. 2 This was followed by the translation of the Roman into Chinese in 1674 and the a year later. Nicolas Standaert and R. G. Tiedemann, Handbook of Christianity in China. 635–1800 (Leiden: Brill, 2001), 627. 3 Notable studies include C. R. Boxer, “European Missionaries and Chinese Clergy, 1654–1810,” in The Age of Partnership: Europeans in Asia before Dominion, eds. Blair B. Kling and M. N. Pearson (Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii, 1979), 97–118; Paul Shan, SJ, “Ludwig Buglio, S. J.: Advocate of a Chinese Native Clergy,” Master’s thesis, Bellarmine College, Baguio City, Philippines, 1955; and François Bontinck, La Lutte Autour De La Liturgie Chinoise Aux XVIIe Et XVIIIe Siècles (Louvain: Éditions Nauwelaerts, 1962). Bontinck’s work is the most compre- hensive. See also, Standaert, Handbook of Christianity in China, 462–463, for a summary of the topic. In this chapter, I have tried to limit repetition only to content directly relevant to the angle from which I am approaching the topic—that of the historical context of the Chinese Rites Controversy and the text of the Chinese missal.

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���7 | doi ��.��63/9789004345607_005 The 1670 Chinese Missal 87 ing almost two hundred years of complex history in one chapter, my exposition will focus on key players in these events and major turning points with regard to the socio-political climate of various periods and official pronouncements on the Chinese Rites and Chinese liturgy. Through this contextual study of the 1670 Chinese Missal, I shall show that the historical context of the Chinese Rites Controversy is a hermeneutical key to understanding how and why the missal was translated in certain ways. Additionally, I will demonstrate that as a project that was central to the ordination of indigenous priests, Ludovico Buglio’s, SJ, (1606–1682) translation of the missal was not merely an accommo- dation to the Chinese. The theological, liturgical, political, and pastoral acuity of the translator reveals itself in the translated text, which could have made a major positive impact on the indigenous Church. Unfortunately, however, the missal became embroiled in the mêlée of the Chinese Rites Controversy, and its theological and pastoral potential was never realized.

Matteo Ricci and the “Jesuit Missionary Strategy”

We begin our historical survey with Matteo Ricci, the “father” of the China mission, and undoubtedly the most famous Jesuit missionary of the sixteenth century. Ricci’s impact on world history as a pioneer in the cultural exchange between East and West should not be underestimated. Not only did he intro- duce Western thought to the Chinese and vice versa, he also contributed to Chinese astronomy, mathematics, cartography, and philosophy. In the Church, however, Ricci is most celebrated for exemplifying what many of today’s mis- sionaries take for granted—the indigenization of the faith. Pope Benedict XVI described Ricci’s style of evangelization most aptly in his 2009 message in prep- aration for the of the fourth centenary of Ricci’s death, writ- ing that Ricci was “a model of dialogue and respect for the beliefs of others.”4 What made his apostolate original and prophetic was “the profound sympa- thy he nourished for the Chinese, for their cultures and religious traditions.” Ricci had “made friendship the style of his apostolate during his twenty-eight years in China,” a style of evangelization that used “a scientific methodology and a pastoral strategy based, on the one hand, on respect for the wholesome customs of the place, which Chinese neophytes did not have to abandon when they embraced the Christian faith, and, on the other, on his awareness that the Revelation could enhance and complete” those Chinese customs. It is this legacy of Ricci’s missionary strategy that resonated long after his death

4 “Pope Praises Matteo Ricci’s Evangelization in China,” Catholic News Agency, 18 May 2009.