"Alexandre de la Charme’s Chinese-Manchu treatise 'Xingli zhenquan tigang' (Sing lii jen ciyan bithei hešen) in the early entangled history of Christian, Neo-Confucian, and Manchu Shamanic thought and spirituality as well as early Sinology" / David Bartosch

Published in Religions 2025, 16(7), 891

Abstract:
The work Xingli zhenquan tigang (Sing lii jen ciyan bithei hešen) was written in Chinese and Manchu by the French Jesuit Alexandre de la Charme (1695–1767) and published in Beijing in 1753. The first two sections of this paper provide an introduction to de la Charme’s work biography and to further textual and historical contexts, explore the peculiarities of the subsequent early German reception of the work almost 90 years later, and introduce the content from an overview perspective. The third section explores the most essential contents of Book 1 (of 3) of the Manchu version. The investigation is based on Hans Conon von der Gabelentz’s (1807–1874) German translation from 1840. Camouflaged as a Confucian educational dialogue, and by blurring his true identity in his publication, de la Charme criticizes Neo-Confucian positions from an implicitly Cartesian and hidden Christian perspective, tacitly blending Cartesian views with traditional Chinese concepts. In addition, he alludes to Manchu shamanic views in the same regard. De la Charme’s assimilating rhetoric “triangulation” of three different cultural and linguistic horizons of thought and spirituality proves that later Jesuit scholarship reached out into the inherent ethnic and spiritual diversity of the Qing intellectual and political elites. Hidden allusions to Descartes’s dualistic concepts of res cogitans and res extensa implicitly anticipate the beginnings of China’s intellectual modernization period one and a half centuries later. This work also provides an example of how the exchange of intellectual and religious elements persisted despite the Rites Controversy and demonstrates how the fading Jesuit mission influenced early German sinology. I believe that this previously underexplored work is significant in both systematic and historical respects. It is particularly relevant in the context of current comparative research fields, as well as transcultural and interreligious intellectual dialogue in East Asia and around the world.

'All Things Are Lawful'? Paul’s Reframing of Freedom Through the Lens of Body (1 Corinthians 6:12-20) / by Liang Yichen

https://ccspub.cc/jrcc/article/view/445

Published in Zhongguo jidujiao yanjiu 中國基督教研究 = Journal of Research for Christianity in China, no.26 (2026) : 1-33.

Local access dig.pdf [Liang_Yichen_all_things.pdf]

Abstract:

The relationship between the perception of human body and the understanding of freedom was a contentious issue in early Christian churches. This paper examines Paul's reframing of freedom from the lens of the body in 1 Corinthians 6:12-20. Through a three-tiered methodology—social-historical analysis, rhetorical analysis, and exegetical study of the Corinthian texts—this paper first reconstructs the Corinthians’ theology of body and traces its intellectual roots in the dualistic view of body in Stoicism and the similar dualistic traits manifested in Proto-Gnosticism. I argue that Paul, using the rhetoric of diatribe, challenges this dualistic and individualistic view of body, rejecting its disembodied moral implications and articulating instead a holistic and communal vision of freedom grounded in the embodied participation within the body of Christ. Finally, by engaging in a dialogue between Paul’s reframing of freedom and the Confucian concept of freedom, this paper proposes a constructive hermeneutical bridge for interpreting Pauline concept of freedom in Chinese cultural contexts.

"Merely eros? : rethinking love discourses in pseudo-Dionysius" / Chen Qita

Published in the Journal of the Study on Religion and History No. 2

Abstract:

Scholarly work on love in Pseudo-Dionysius has predominantly focused on elucidating erosas a divine epithet. Interpreted through a Neoplatonic lens, Greek erosthus appears to be the cornerstone of Dionysius’s conception of love. However, a closer examination of the Dionysian corpus reveals that two related concepts–notably philanthropy and communion–remain understudied. The two notions are integral to Dionysius’s treatment of the triadic structure of love: providential care, mutual love, and the return oflove. This article contends that philanthropy and communion are essential for understanding Dionysian eros. By situating Christ’s philanthropy and the loving communion in the middle term of mutual love, we can better grasp the rich connotations of eros within Dionysian theology

'Qingnian Lude' sixiang zhong de 'zhexue' yu 'shensheng shenxue' : jiyu 《〈sibu yulu〉 bianzhu》de gean fenxi “青年路德”思想中的“哲學”與“神聖神學”——基于《〈四部語錄〉邊注》的個案分析 = The “Philosophy” and “Sacred Theology” in the Thought of “Young Luther”：A Case Study Based on the Randbemerkungen of Sentences / by Li Hao 李浩

Published in Guoxue yu xixue 國學與西學 = International journal of Sino-western studies, no.29 (2025) : 188-201.

Local access dig.pdf [Li_Hao_Qingnian_Lude.pdf]

Abstract:

路德對哲學的“敵意”在他的青年時期就已有明顯體現：在對《四部語錄》的“邊注”中就已經通過“神聖神學”這一術語來表達神學與哲學的區分。其思路不僅繼承自唯名論對自然與恩典之不連續性的探討，而且更加強烈地表現出他對於哲學化的神學命題的不滿。在最具代表性的、針對“習性是聖靈”的攻擊和駁斥中，路德不僅否認阿奎那的“習性的恩典”，還基於“聖靈是愛”這一具有《聖經》支持的純粹的神學命題，拒絶了司各脫的“愛的習性”。針對前者，路德將恩典置於與上帝共同先在的位置，從而否認恩典的受造性及其與自然的合作；針對後者，路德訴諸愛與三一上帝的關繫，確認了愛與習性的本體論差異，進而否認將習性與愛等同或直接關聯。總之，儘管青年路德對哲學和神學的理解仍具唯名論色彩，但開始更多地轉向尋求《聖經》的支持。不過，此時路德的思維仍囿於“自然與恩典”，尚未進入“律法與福音”。

Luther’s “hostility” toward philosophy was already evident in his early period: intheRandbemerkungen of Sentences, he used the term “sacred theology” to distinguish between theologyandphilosophy. His approach not only inherits the nominalist view of the discontinuity between nature and gracebut also demonstrates a stronger dissatisfaction with philosophically-framed theological propositions. In his most representative critique of the proposition “habit is the Holy Spirit,” Luther not only denies Aquinas’s concept of“habitual grace” (habituale gratiae) but also, drawing upon the purely theological and biblically-supportedproposition that “the Holy Spirit is love,” refutes Scotus’s notion of the “habit of love” (habitus caritatis). Against the former, Luther posits grace as uncreated and co-eternal with God, thereby denying its creatednatureand its cooperation with nature. Against the latter, Luther appeals to the relationship between love and the TriuneGod to establish the ontological difference between love and habit, thereby denying any equation of or direct connection between them. In short, while young Luther’s understanding of philosophy and theologywasinfluenced by nominalism, he began to turn more toward seeking support from the Bible. However, his thought at this stage was still confined to the framework of “nature and grace” and had not yet advanced to his maturedialectic of “law and gospel”.