A CATHOLIC CATECHISM IN MANCHU Author(s): John L. Mish Reviewed work(s): Source: Monumenta Serica, Vol. 17 (1958), pp. 361-372 Published by: Monumenta Serica Institute Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40725571 . Accessed: 16/06/2012 16:25 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected]
Monumenta Serica Institute is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Monumenta Serica.
http://www.jstor.org
A CATHOLIC CATECHISM IN MANCHU Dr. JohnL. Mish, New YorkPublic Library Whenevermissionariesset out to preach their faith among cultural background,theyare conpeople of a totally different frontedwiththe formidable task of translatingalien conceptions into anotherlanguagethatmayhaveno equivalentwordsforthem at all. In thecase of China,this happenedat least twice- if we exceptthe limited,and rather local impactof Islam-: once in the firstcenturiesof the Christianera, when Buddhismreached thecountry, and again in the17thcentury, whenChristianmissionizin In earnest. bothcases, skilfultranslatorswereable ing began to buildon nativewordmaterial,by infusingnew meaningsinto wordsalreadyused. The early Buddhiststook over manyterms of Taoist philosophy(e.g. tao it for Buddha's "Aryan path"). In a similarway, the early Jesuits,beginningwith Ricci, were able to use wordswhich,owingto Buddhistinfluence, had acquired that were at akin least to Christian meanings conceptions.Such, forinstance,is the wordti-yüjé gfc(nai loo in our Manchutext) whichis employedfor" hell", thoughBuddhisthells are essentially fromthe Christianidea (they are only temporary,for different one thing). Anotheris endebuku,Chinesetsui fp whichis used forthe Christianconceptionof " sin", thougha Confucianscholar, a Taoist,and a Buddhistwould understandit differently, each in his own way. The supremeordealin China was to finda suitable " equivalentfor God". The existingwordsweredeemed- correctly so - too vague, especiallyshen 9$, which may mean any kindof spiritualbeing. The nearestequivalentmighthave been fien ^, but that was definitely too impersonalor pantheistic.Aftersome theJesuitsdecidedont'ien-chu^ ± (LordofHeaven), deliberation, whichwas sanctionedby Rome. It is a most felicitoussolution of the problem; and yettheentirecontroversy abouthowto render " God" best in Chinesewas renewed in the 19th century,when the firstProtestantmissionaries arrived. As is well known,they finallyagreed on the termshang-ti_h^, whichoccursalreadyin the oldestChineseliteratureextant. (See Creel, Birth of China, 361
362
JOHN L