New Trends in the Historiography of Christianity in China

NEW TRENDS IN THE HISTORIOGRAPHY OF CHRISTIANITY IN CHINA Nicolas Standaert, S.J.* In this article I wiU attempt to discern new trends in the historiography of Christianity in China. I wUl take the major paradigm shift achieved in recent years as a starting point. This shift was from a mainly missiological and Eurocentric to a Sinological and Sinocentric approach. By connecting this shift with the discussion around OrientaUsm, I wUl underscore the advantages of this shift, but also the possible limits. In a second part I wiU discuss some major methodological questions: positivist and textual history (China, Europe) versus interpretative and narrative history (United States). In addition, in a third programmatic section, new topics of research will be indicated. These topics are inspired by developments in the study of history in general. Finally, different interpretative schemes will be discussed: Was Christianity a type of cultural contact, a factor in the modernization, a marginal religion, a civilizing project, or an encounter with the other? The purpose of this presentation is neither to give a fuU synthesis of aU that has been achieved, nor to present an overaU conclusion, but rather to stimulate a discussion about the way in which we study Christianity in China. In this article I wUl limit my examples mainly to the preeighteenth century. Most of the remarks, however, can be extended to post-eighteenth century as weU. 1. Major Paradigm Shift In the last twenty-five years an important paradigm shift took place in the study of Christianity in China. In general, this shift can be described 'Father Standaert is professor of Chinese Studies in the Catholic University of Leuven. He wishes to express his gratitude to Dr.A.Dudink,Dr.N.Golves,Dr.C.Jami,and Professor J. Tollebeek for their comments on an earlier version of this text. 573 574NEW TRENDS IN THE HISTORIOGRAPHY OF CHRISTIANITY IN CHINA as a change from a mainly missiological and Eurocentric to a Sinological and Sinocentric approach. This shift was expressed by a change in methodology, in the nature of research subjects, and the background of the historians themselves. Until the beginning of the 1960s, the main question that occupied the attention of historians was the question of presentation: "What did the missionaries do to introduce and proclaim Christianity in China? How effective were the missionaries and what means did they use?"The historians were interested in the overaU success of the missionaries, the ways by which they led the Chinese to Christianity, and the extent of the influence of Western science and art. Through the introduction of missiology as a theological discipline in the 1920s and 1930s, researchers wanted to know whether the Chinese experience was representative of a certain missiological approach (especiaUy after World War II with the discussion around the terms "accommodation" and "adaptation"). Research focused on the activities of the missionaries.As a result, many studies of the famous missionaries Matteo Ricci, Adam SchaU von BeU, and Ferdinand Verbiest were pubUshed. It is not surprising that each of these missionaries was studied primarily, but not exclusively , by fellow countrymen (e.g., respectively by P. M. d'Elia, A.Väth, H. Bosmans). Texts in Western languages (letters, travel-stories) formed the most important source of information. Chinese sources were not always neglected, but were rarely objects of a distinct study, unless they were texts written by missionaries. Interest in the reaction of the Chinese was mostly limited to their support of the missionaries. Chinese historians, such as Fang Hao, paid more attention to Chinese authors, and consequently to Chinese sources, but on the whole shared the same missiological approach. GraduaUy some changes took place and a new perspective was added to this study. The new question that attracted the attention ofhistorians was that of reception:"How did the Chinese accept Christianity or Western sciences? How did they react toward the missionaries?" Their attention was not limited to positive reception, but included the study of anti-Christian movements. Now the Chinese texts became the primary source of research. Some research continued to be missiological in nature, but followed the new perspective by shifting the focus of its interest to the local (indigenous) churches. Another major...