During his life in China for nearly 30 years, Matteo RICCI, as a Jesuit missionary dared not identify himself as a“priest”all the time, but as a“(Buddhist) monk”in the first more than 10 years and yet as a“Confucian”in the final more than 10 years for concealing his purpose of doing missionary work in China. It is undoubted that for a public figure, this identity conversion not only needed a great courage and boldness, but also existed a more embarrassing risk situation he would be caught in because of carelessness if any. But why Matteo RICCI dared to have such an identity conversion“from a (Buddhist) monk to a Confucian”? As a matter of fact, such an action was determined after meticulous thinking and repeated measures by not only Matteo RICCI but also the whole oriental Jesuit for the reason that for Matteo RICCI, whether being as a“(Buddhist) monk”or a“Confucian”was nothing but just his temporary expedient for concealing his own true identity and both had no significant distinctions each other. However, by contrast, identity as a (Buddhist) monk not only failed to promote the development of Jesuit’s missionary cause, but also brought about numerous difficulties and obstacles, while identity as a Confucian could make up for some defects resulting from the identity as a (Buddhist) monk and promote the implementation of the missionary route of upper strata as well as defused some difficulties and setbacks encountered in the missionary process.%在中国近30年时间里，作为传教士的利玛窦，为了掩盖传教之目的，竟然一直不敢以“神父”身份自称，而是前十几年以“僧人”自称，后十几年以“儒者”自居。无疑，对于一个公众人物而言，这种身份上的转换不仅需要一种巨大的勇气与魄力，而且还存在稍有不慎就会使自己陷入更为难堪的风险境地。然利玛窦为何在异地竟敢“由僧到儒”进行身份上的转换？其实，对于此举，不仅利玛窦，乃至整个东方耶稣会都是经过缜密思考与反复衡量才决定的。因为，对利玛窦而言，无论是“僧人”，还是“儒者”，都不过是他掩盖自身真实身份的权设而已，并无特大之差别。但两者相较而言，僧人身份不仅没能促进传教事业的发展，反而带来重重困难与障碍，而儒者身份则既可弥补僧者身份上所导致的一些缺陷，而且还可推动上层传教路线的实施，以及化解传教过程中所遇到的一些困难与挫折。
展开▼
