Abstract
The “Resposta breve” (Brief response, 1623–24) by Niccolò Longobardo was one of the most controversial documents ever penned in the Jesuit China mission. Longobardo criticized the use of indigenous Chinese vocabulary by Matteo Ricci to express Christian concepts as a perilous accommodation to diabolical monism. This article proposes a close reading of how Longobardo employed Scholastic, humanist, and Chinese sources to critique Ricci's disregard for the neo-Confucian interpreters in his reading of ancient Confucianism. It argues that Longobardo's polemic with Ricci was not theological in nature but reflected his distrust of philology in reconstructing the original meaning of ancient texts.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Literature and Literary Theory,Visual Arts and Performing Arts,History
Reference64 articles.
1. Protestant versus Prophet: Isaac Casaubon on Hermes Trismegistus
2. La critica di Francesco Patrizi ai ‘Principia’ aristotelici;Vasoli;Rivista di Storia della Filosofia,1996
3. Un dossier bibliographique de la fin du XVIIe siècle sur la question des termes Chinois;Bernard-Maître;Recherches de science religieuse,1949
Cited by
7 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献