君師之間──晚明思想場中的歐洲教宗制

Between Monarch and Master: Literati’s Diverse Interpretations of the Pope in Late Ming China

在歐洲蒙時代，中國曾被伏爾泰等奉為開明專制的典範，此學界所熟知；在晚明時期，歐洲教宗制也被國人視為中國政治的他山之石，此學界所鮮知。自明萬曆年間，善於捕捉中國思想風向的利瑪竇與艾儒略，即有意識地向中國士人宣揚教宗制具有主持教化、傳賢不婚、盛德無私、權大於君等優點。介於君師之間的教宗，很快成為晚明士人的討論話題：褒美者如葛寅亮、黃景昉、周應賓、張岱等，認為教宗制與儒家傳賢論、師道觀等契合，甚至讚譽教宗制超越三代，合孔子、墨子、老子、釋迦摩尼、齊桓公與晉文公於一人；而批評者則將教宗制斥為悖亂綱常、破壞治統的二主夷風。藉由點評教宗制，晚明士人的一些隱微思想得以輾轉吐露，多元聲音背後暗含著政治思想的分歧。明清鼎革後，君師合一的獨尊型政治格局逐漸奠定，師道淪為君權附庸，教宗制隨之淡出中國士人的論域。

Scholars have discussed in depth how China was once regarded by Voltaire (1694-1778) and others as a paragon of enlightened absolutism during the Age of Enlightenment in Europe, but have largely overlooked the fact that Chinese literati also considered the European pope as a political model in the late Ming dynasty. Under the reign of the Wanli Emperor of the Ming, Matteo Ricci (1552-1610) and Giulio Aleni (1582-1649), both skilled at apprehending Chinese intellectual trends, intentionally promoted to the Chinese literati that the papal system had many advantages, such as taking charge of moralization, selecting successors by election rather than kinship, not marrying, being selfless, and having power over the emperor. The pope quickly became a controversial topic among literati in late Ming China. On the one hand, advocators such as Ge Yinliang葛寅亮(1570-1646), Huang Jingfang黃景昉(1596-1662), Zhou Yingbin周應賓(1554-1626), and Zhang Dai張岱(1597-1680) believed that the papal system was compatible with the Confucian abdication system and the way of the“master”師. They even praised the papal system for having surpassed the“three earliest dynasties”and being able to combine the merits of Confucius, Mozi, Laozi, Shakyamuni, Duke Huan of Qi齊桓公, and Duke Wen of Jin晉文公all into one individual. But on the other, critics denounced the papal system as a threat to the monarchical power. The divergent voices in these commentaries on the papal system reveal the subtle differences in late Ming literati’s political and ideological thoughts. After entering the Qing dynasty, the unity of the emperor and the“master”was gradually established, with the“master”becoming the subordinate of the monarchy. As a result, the topic concerning the papal system faded out of the Chinese literati’s discourse.