Yilun Cai 

Abstract

　　During the first half of the seventeenth century, the Jesuit missionaries in China tried to respond to the Confucian idea of following the Heaven-ordained nature. Ricci distinguished the good of nature and the good of virtue to hold the importance of developing virtue. Pantoja and Aleni took a further step by proposing overcoming human nature and insisting that the Christian Way is not the same as the Confucian one. This Catholic response to Confucianism gave people the impression that the doctrine of original sin makes it impossible for Christians to engage in a dialogue with Confucianism concerning the goodness of human nature. In my view, however, the image of God can provide us the source to dialogue with Mencius’ famous teaching on the goodness of human nature.

Introduction

　　The question of human nature is one of the controversial issues in the Reformation. In the debate with Protestants, Catholic theologians usually stood for the position which recognized that some good of nature remains after Adam’s fall. When Matteo Ricci entered mainland China in 1583, he quickly realized that the question of human nature was popular among the Chinese literati, because nature (xing) and mind (xin) were topics at the heart of neo-Confucianism. Ricci left us a vivid and interesting account of his debate with the Chinese on the good of human nature in Nanjing in 1599 (Ricci, 2016, p. 316). Around the time of Ricci’s death in 1610, his Jesuit collaborator Diego de Pantoja held that one must overcome human nature, rather than follow it. In the 1630s, Giulio Aleni, preaching to converts in Fujian, repeated Pantoja’s teaching and formulated “to overcome nature is the Way”. Aleni’s proposition provided a Catholic counterpart to the Confucian axiom “to follow nature is the Way”. In this article, I will outline the development of the Jesuit teaching on human nature from Ricci to Aleni. Following the historical exploration, I will try to present a theological reflection on the Jesuits’ teaching on the good of human nature in the context of a dialogue with Confucianism.

1. Ricci on the good of nature and the need to overcome self

　　The early Jesuits preferred St Thomas Aquinas’ teaching in their philosophical and theological formation. Inheriting the Thomistic theological tradition, Ricci insisted that the substance of human nature is good. In Summa theologiae I-II q. 85, St Thomas synthesized two traditions in evaluating the effect of original sin on our human nature: one is the Greek tradition that underlines “natural good remains unimpaired” (naturalia manet integra); the other is the Latin tradition that emphasizes our nature has been wounded by the corruption of sin and been stripped of supernatural gifts. According to the Angelic Doctor, there are three kinds of the good of nature (bonum naturae): 1) the principles of which nature is constituted (i.e., powers flowing from man as a rational being, such as human reason). This good is not diminished by original sin because Adam’s offspring is still a rational being; 2) the inclination to virtue, which is diminished by original sin because sin is opposed to virtue. However, the root of inclination (radix inclinationis) to virtue always remains (Thomas Aquinas, 1920, ST I-II q. 85, a. 2.); 3) the gift of original justice that is entirely destroyed by original sin (Thomas Aquinas, 1920, ST I-II q. 85). The nuance helps Thomas to illustrate that the good of nature has not been totally destroyed. Besides, Thomas also thought that the disposition or aptitude for grace could not be completely taken away by sin (Thomas Aquinas, 1920, ST I-II q. 85). He adopted the term “naturally capable of grace” (gratiae capax) to stress that the soul retains the capacity to receive grace (Thomas Aquinas, 1920, ST I-II q. 113, a. 10). In De malo q.2 a. 11, ad. 1, he also used phrases like “the substance of natural good” (quantum ad substantiam boni naturalis).

　　This Thomistic doctrine was received in Ricci’s teaching on human nature. He coined the term “the substance of nature” (性之體 or 性體) to explain the existence of good in human nature. We can find its usage at different points in Ricci’s catechism, The True Meaning of the Lord of Heaven (天主實義hereafter TTMLH), like: “the substance of man’s nature (性體) is good and cannot be destroyed because of evil deeds.” (Ricci, 2016, n. 578)

“Because our nature has been infected with disease, when we come into contact with things, we gain a mistaken impression of them, which is not in accordance with reason; our loves and hates and our judgments concerning the rightness and wrongness of things are seldom correct and seldom true. Nevertheless, our fundamental nature was originally good. So that there is no reason why one should not say it is good. Our fundamental nature (本性) was originally good.” (Ricci, 2016, n. 429)

　　According to Ricci, the goodness of nature remains after Adam’s sin, even if this good is no longer perfect. Adam’s sin corrupted the root of human nature, so our moral judgments are not always right. However, the substance of human nature itself (性之體/本性) or our fundamental nature is good because God created it. Sin and evil cannot totally destroy it. Here, in the substance of nature (性之體) or the original nature (本性) Ricci accommodates two aspects of Thomistic doctrine on bonum naturae in us: 1) the rational capacity in humans remains in corrupt human nature, but 2) there is a diminished inclination to virtue. The good of nature in us provides the possibility for human beings to do good. In this regard, one may still be able to perfect it by virtuous works.

　　Ricci made a clear distinction between innate goodness (良善) and acquired goodness (德善) to show that the substance of nature is not sufficient for achieving perfection, and thereby one has to be aware of the need to carry out virtuous work (Ricci, 2010, 316). He insisted that virtuous conduct perfects the goodness of nature and expresses nature’s goodness (Ricci, 2016, n. 432). In this sense, virtue is the precious adornment of the spirit (Ricci, 2016, n. 438). One should adorn innate nature with embroidered garments that are virtues.

2. Overcoming self in Ricci, Pantoja and Aleni

　　Ricci noted that overcoming self (克己) is indispensable for developing virtue in TTMLH. In Chapter 7, he defined courage as self-conquest (Ricci, 2016, n. 462). In the arguments for the convenience of celibacy in Chapter 8, Ricci reminded his readers of the role of overcoming self and desire in serving God (n. 532). This appreciation of overcoming self is more systematically presented in Pantoja’s Qike (七克 The Seven Victories, 1614), where the Jesuit explores how to overcome the seven deadly sins. In a similar way, Aleni taught the faithful in Fujian that one should subdue oneself again and again when practicing the Seven Victories to reach the state of having few sins (Aleni, 2007, p. 274). For Jesuits of the early modern period, overcoming self (vincere seipsum) was not foreign to their spirituality. Indebted to the devotio moderna, Ignatius used this term in the Spiritual Exercises to urge his followers to conquer themselves and finally be freed from worldly attachment. The exegesis of Confucius’ words “to master oneself (克己 keji) and return to propriety is humanity” (Analects 12). Due to this similarity, it was not hard for the Jesuit missionaries to link keji to vincere seipsum and adopt overcoming self in their preaching of the Christian faith.

3. Overcoming nature in Pantoja and Aleni

　　Although Pantoja and Aleni agreed that the substance of our nature is good and overcoming self would further our spiritual progress, the doctrine of original sin led them to doubt the Confucian tenet of following human nature. In Quan renlei yuanshi (詮人類原始An Explanation of the Origin of the Human Race, 1610), a work explaining the Christian doctrine on the origin of human beings, Pantoja explicitly announced this position:

“I observe that today most of the people who practise the Way act in the name of following human nature. There is only one nature, and not only one Way. Why? Principle (li) and desire are mingled in nature, making distinguishing difficult. It always happens that one mistakes following the evil of nature as following the righteousness of nature. For this reason, the saints in the West see overcoming nature as the way of cultivation. Their efforts to transform people and cultivate the Way do not aim at following nature but worshipping God. It is not because the Way of God is not the same as the Way of nature, but because nature is corrupt. If we follow it to know principle, we would be like the blind; if we follow it to do good, we would fall. Nature is not sufficient for leading a noble path.” (Pantoja, 2019, p. 256)^[1]

It is interesting to note that Pantoja expressed the Catholic understanding of human nature after Adam’s sin in a neo-Confucian way: “principle and desire are mingled in nature”. According to Zhu Xi’s philosophy, the nature of Heaven is always mingled with the nature of material force in a concrete human. The mixture of two natures is the origin of desire and passion, and thereby one has to restore the nature of Heaven, which is the same as principle. For Pantoja, therefore, this expression enables him to communicate to the Chinese audience how disorder is brought about by original sin to our nature. This disorder causes weakness in our reason and will. For this reason, it is hard for us to know truth and do good.

　　In another place of the same work, Pantoja elucidates the weakness through the term “the disease of nature” (性病) or “the disease in nature” (性內之病):

“Since the ancestors obeyed the daemon…[h]umans are perplexed by the correct principle and are addicted to evil. The disease of nature starts from it. For people today, …they put all lifelong endeavor into cultivating the good and subduing evil, but they cannot entirely eliminate evil intentions and dirty desires.” (Pantoja, 2019, p. 256)^[2]

Before Pantoja, the term “the disease of nature” appeared in Ricci’s TTMLH, but this idea was not an invention of the Jesuit missionaries. In ST I-II q. 85, a. 3, Thomas mentioned wounds (vulnera) of nature which left the soul destitute of its proper order. Most probably, reflecting on the wounds of nature inspired the Jesuits to use “the disease of nature” to illustrate the incapacity of our current nature to achieve perfection. It is because of this weakness of nature that we are unable to overcome all selfish desires even if we put a lot of effort into moral and spiritual cultivation. The problem is not about habit, but our nature spoiled by original sin. Seen from this perspective, one must overcome nature rather than follow it.^[3]

　　In 1631, Aleni repeated the teaching of overcoming nature, but put it in a more explicit way to highlight the discrepancy between Catholicism and Confucianism:

“After a while the crowd [of believers] went home. Weng Yunjian had prepared a meal. I used the occasion to ask for instruction, saying: ‘In [helping to build] the church I may have made a slight contribution, but I still am unable to subdue the sin of gluttony.’”

“The master said: ‘Zisi has said that ‘Following human nature is called the Way’, but I rather would say ‘Subduing human nature is called the Way’. …But at present the nature of man is no more what it originally was. How could we realize the Way without subduing it?’” (Aleni, 2007, vol. 1, p. 273)

In this record, Aleni tried to explain how to subdue the sin of gluttony, but evidently Aleni did not linger on how to overcome a particular sin. He instead sought the answer to the origin of our sins: the corruption of human nature and its tendency towards evil. The root of our particular sins is spoiled human nature, so the ultimate solution is to overcome human nature’s inclination to sin. The effort of overcoming deadly sins culminates in overcoming the wounds of human nature corrupted by original sin. In this regard, one has to say “to overcome nature is the Way”, rather than “to follow nature is the Way”.

4. A theological reflection

　　After exploring the teaching of human nature in three Jesuit missionaries and outlining the origin of overcoming human nature, I would like to reflect on whether a dialogue between Catholicism and Confucianism can achieve consensus on the issue of human nature. We have seen that the Pantoja and Aleni distinguished human nature in its original state and actual state in order to contend that the actual nature is to be conquered, not to be followed. Nevertheless, we have to note that although phrases like vincitur natura appear once in St Thomas’ In Catena in Mt. cap. 22, 19, overcoming human nature is not a predominant theological theme in Thomistic or Catholic theology. In my view, we should note the following Thomistic theological sources in understanding the good of human nature:

　　Firstly, our current human nature is not entirely spoiled in a way that no good exists. St Thomas clearly expressed this idea in the ST:

“But in the state of corrupted nature, man falls short of what he could do by his nature, so that he is unable to fulfil it by his own natural powers. Yet because human nature is not altogether corrupted by sin, so as to be shorn of every natural good, even in the state of corrupted nature it can, by virtue of its natural endowments, work some particular good.” (Thomas Aquinas, 1920, ST 1-2, q. 109, a. 2.)

As Cajetan observed in his commentary on this text (Cajetan, In 1-2, q.109, a. 2, n. 11), if in the state of corrupted nature, one cannot do any moral good by one’s own powers, all the acts of pagans would be morally evil. Of course, the Thomistic school never accepted the conclusion that every act of pagans is morally evil. In both ST I-II, q. 85 and q. 109, St Thomas believed that Adam’s offspring could do some good, even if only in a limited way.

　　Secondly, the theme of the image of God provides a fundamental reason for the possibility of becoming perfect. For St Thomas, man as the image of God is closely related to the end of humans. Each human has the supernatural vocation to return to God or take God as the end because everyone is created in the image of God. However, in this life, humans as the image of God are not perfect:

“In the first sense the Son is the Image of the Father; in the second sense man is called the image of God; and therefore in order to express the imperfect character of the divine image in man, man is not simply called the image, but ‘to the image,’ whereby is expressed a certain movement of tendency to perfection.” (Thomas Aquinas, 1920, ST 1, q. 35, a. 2, ad. 3)

Thus, as the image of God, humans always incline to their perfection. St Thomas used the term “to the image” to explain this imperfection and highlight the human inclination toward perfection. From imperfection to perfection is a dynamic progression of imitating God. At the end of this dynamic progression, the image of God in humans would be fully realized. Therefore, the theological theme “the image of God” highlights humans’ potentialities to become God. In the state of corrupt nature, even if our capacities of knowing truth or doing good are limited due to the effects of original sin, our supernatural vocation to return to God in a dynamic progression is never lost.

　　How can we put this meaning of human nature’s good in dialogue with Confucianism? In the Chinese philosophical tradition, Mencius is famous for his teaching on the goodness of human nature. An elaborate explanation of the meaning of this goodness is available in the following text in Mencius:

“‘As far as what is genuinely in him is concerned, a man is capable of becoming good,’ said Mencius, ‘That is what I mean by good. As for his becoming bad, that is not the fault of his native endowment.’” (Mencius, 2003, p. 125)^[4]

In what sense can we say human nature is good? Mencius used the words keyi (is capable of) (See also Dai, 1982, 41) to illustrate the reality of human nature: What human beings really are consists in being “capable of becoming good”. For Mencius, human nature is good, not because all humans are already fully good, but because of human potentialities to be good. In other words, to confirm the goodness of human nature does not exclude the possibility or the fact of bad human acts. This point is implied in “[a]s for his becoming bad”.

　　By reading Thomas Aquinas and Mencius together, we may find a foundation for a dialogue between Catholic theology and Confucianism. As we have seen, both of them noted the dynamic feature of human nature. In Mencius, the possibility of becoming good exists in human nature, so one must not let go of his true heart and should pay attention to the nourishment of human nature. To contend for the goodness of human nature does not necessarily lead to admitting that each man is de facto good. Similarly, the theme of the image of God in St Thomas provides some insights which are usually not emphasized in the doctrine of original sin. It helps us appreciate human nature’s possibilities of culmination in its final glory, even in the state of corrupt nature. Since we are created as the image of God, the full sense of humans can only be discovered with reference to their supernatural end. Adam’s offspring still keep the aptitude for grace, and thereby the possibility of attaining the likeness to God remains in them. Grace does not destroy nature, but perfects it. This well-known axiom in Catholic theology illustrates the point. God’s grace first heals corrupt nature and then elevates it. To put it in another way, grace must be received in human nature. Fulfilling the capacity of one’s nature amounts to becoming a human in the full sense. Finally, in Mencius, the dynamic good in human nature needs development, and the Thomistic perspective on human potentialities to become perfect also calls for cultivation. In this regard, any imperfection found in fallen human nature should not shed a pessimistic light on the Christian life but rather remind us of the spiritual journey, which fulfils the capacity in nature and leads to perfection (Cai, 2022).

^[1]Translation is mine. (我觀今修道者多以率性為名。夫性一而道不一，斯何以故？惟性之理慾交雜，殊難剖判，率性之邪而自以為率性之正者，時有矣。故我西國聖賢以克性為功，其化民修道也，亦弗敢以率性為勸而以奉上帝為勸。非上帝之道異於性道，惟性朽壞污穢，以明理則如矇，以行善則如蹶，不足為正道之御故耳。)

^[2]Translation is mine. (自先祖聽魔之後，性雖原善如故，然諸德遂墮而諸慾自芽，惑於正理，沈於邪惡，性病從此肇焉。試觀今人。。。即修善攻私，終身不懈，而斜念穢慾不能盡消。此以知行惡甚順，行善甚逆，非徒因習於惡，乃實性內之病耳。)

^[3]We have to note that for the Jesuits, perfection was dependent on grace. Perfection is not purely a human work. For example, “only by grace and virtues man can purify his heart.” (人惟有額辣濟亞及諸美德以清潔潤澤其心。) Pantoja, 2019, p. 254. “Some arrogant people think that the power of cultivation and subduing desire is from themselves. They do not know that in this life every single thought of doing good comes from God.” (夫世之傲然自是者，咸謂修德克欲之力量，我自能之。不知自有生來，但有一念提醒，莫非天主上帝賜我者。) Pantoja, 2019, p. 12.

^[4](孟子曰：“乃若其情，則可以為善矣，乃所謂善也。若夫為不善，非才之罪也。”)

Yilun Cai, is Assistant Professor of Faculty of Religious Studies and Philosophy at University of Saint Joseph, Macau.

REFERENCES

• Aleni, Giulio (2007). Kouduo richao Li Jiubiao’s Diary of Oral Admonitions, A Late Ming Christian Journal. Trans. with Introduction and Notes by Erick Zürcher. Sankt Augustin: Institut Monumenta Serica.
• Cai, Yilun (2022). “To follow or overcome our nature? Reflections on the goodness of human nature with Mencius and Thomas Aquinas”, Gregorianum 103 (2022), 691-712.
• Dai, Zhen (1982)（戴震). Mengzi Ziyi Shuzheng (孟子字義疏正), Book III. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju.
• Mencius (2003). Mencius VI, A: 6, trans. Lau. London: Penguin Books.
• Pantoja, Diego de (2019). Escritos de Diego de Pantoja, Ye Nong (ed.)（耶穌會士龐迪我中文著述集）. Guangzhou: Guangdong Renming Press
• Ricci, Matteo (2010). Della entrata della Compagnia di Gesù e Christianità nella Cina. M. Del Gatto (ed.). Macerata: Quodlibet.
• Ricci, Matteo (2016). The True Meaning of the Lord of Heaven. Revised edition by Thierry Meynard, S.J., Translated by Douglas Lancashire and Peter Hu Kuo-chen, SJ. Boston: Institute of Jesuit Sources.
• Thomas Aquinas (1920). Summa theologiae. Translation by Fathers of the English Dominican Province, Second and Revised Edition. Online edition (2017) https://www.newadvent.org/summa/.

Click here to view the PDF version