Xu Zongze’s Translation Theories and Practices in the Jesuit Revue Catholique

Abstract

This paper examines the translation theories and practices of Xu Zongze 徐宗澤 (1886–1947), a key figure in the Jesuit community of the Zi-ka-wei compound 徐家匯. Descending from the prominent Catholic Xu family and serving as chief editor of the Revue Catholique 聖教雜誌, Xu was uniquely positioned to engage in religious and cultural dialogues. By situating Xu within modern China’s translation history, this paper highlights his significant contributions to translation scholarship, especially in merging Western religious thought with Chinese traditions. Xu utilized the “Discussion” column of the Revue for his “Treatise on Translation” 譯書論, celebrating Jesuit translation accomplishments and examining historical policies. His works advocate for using the Jesuit legacy in contemporary translation debates to enhance cultural understanding. Xu’s efforts, including the Synopsis of Jesuit Translations during the Ming and Qing Dynasties 明清間耶穌會士譯著提要 and the “New Terms” series, resist linguistic dominance while facilitating intercultural understanding. Through his translation experience and Jesuit cultural initiatives, Xu Zongze advocated for the establishment of a Catholic translation institute aimed at developing talent and enhancing communication with Catholic publishers. By centering on Xu, this study reexamines the role of Zi-ka-wei within the context of modern Chinese translation history, evaluating how its engagement with Western knowledge effectively addressed the intellectual demands of the era, which called for contemporary interpretations.

1. Introduction

The intellectual history of translation in modern China represents a vital yet underexplored area within translation studies, crucial for understanding the discipline’s evolution. Traditionally focused on translators and grounded in classical Chinese literary aesthetic studies (B. Wang 2018, pp. 7–8), recent scholarship has shifted towards incorporating Western linguistic paradigms and interdisciplinary methods that examine the history of reading and publishing. This comprehensive approach can deepen our understanding of the intellectual dynamics shaping Chinese translation, especially in contexts like Zi-ka-wei, which exemplifies Sino–Western linguistic exchange and serves as a significant site for Jesuit and Chinese scholarly collaborations extended from the late imperial dynasties (Uchida 2010, p. 1).

The establishment of a Jesuit library by Nicolas Trigault (Standaert 2003, pp. 367–91) and various translation projects, such as Feng Chengjun 馮承鈞’s retranslation of Jesuit accounts (Bernard 1935, pp. 208–10), highlight the complexities of intercultural exchanges in this region. Additionally, the localization of Catholicism in China is prominently reflected in the extensive Bible translations produced by Jesuit missionaries, which played a critical role in adapting Catholic teachings to the Chinese cultural context (Li 2019). The localization effort of Catholicism in China is exemplified by the innovative translation principles of figures like Ma Xiangbo, whose work reveals a thoughtful integration of classical Chinese resources into the Bible (Choi 2018, pp. 24–26; Lam 2000, pp. 43–64). In his “Proposal for the Unification of Biblical Texts” 統一經文芻議, Ma emphasizes standards of elegance, clarity, and adherence to faith, showcasing a refined style that incorporates classical texts, such as the I Ching. The translation efforts at Zi-ka-wei highlight a significant growth in translated texts over six decades and underscore the vital role of translation in facilitating cultural exchange.

Adopting a “biographical-textual” perspective enhances the study of translation efforts by exploring the connections between translators’ life stories and their works, thereby revealing the cultural implications of their contributions. Xu Zongze’s editorial work in Revue Catholique exemplifies this ongoing dialogue between Chinese and Western thought (Kurtz 2010, pp. 79–109), highlighting the transformative power of translation in shaping cultural and intellectual landscapes. This approach underscores the essential role of religious translation in fostering cultural connections and understanding, which aligns with the Special Issue’s theme of exploring Chinese religious traditions and their impact on cultural exchange and civilization. By investigating these various dimensions, this contribution gains a deeper appreciation for the multifaceted contributions of translation to cultural exchange and the modern intellectual history of China.

2. The Multiple Intellectual Identities of Xu Zongze

Xu Zongze was a pivotal intellectual mediator in Republican-era China, who translated not only texts but also conceptual frameworks between Chinese and Western traditions. His unique authority stemmed from both his deep training in Jesuit theology and his direct descent from the Ming scholar-official Xu Guangqi 徐光啟, which enabled him to present terms such as “ethics” 伦理 not as foreign imports, but as concepts capable of integration within modern Chinese thought.

Born in Qingpu, Jiangsu, Xu passed the imperial children’s examination at 19, entered the Jesuit order at 20, and went on to earn doctorates in philosophy and theology abroad before being ordained as a priest. His intellectual development was profoundly shaped by Jesuit educational initiatives, such as the Jiangnan Scientific Plan, reflecting a commitment to cross-cultural knowledge exchange (Colombel 2018; Mo 2021; Zhang 2024).

Upon returning to China, Xu Zongze joined Zi-ka-wei College, a hub of Jesuit cultural and educational activities. In 1921, he expanded his work to Nanhui County, integrating missionary efforts with educational initiatives. By 1923, as editor of Revue Catholique, he systematically translated Western texts across the humanities and social sciences, fostering East–West dialogue. Through these publications, Xu advanced his vision of education as a transformative force, shaping ethical discourse in Chinese society while solidifying his role as a key cultural intermediary.

Among his most influential works are The Introduction to Religious Studies (Xu 1939) and The Introduction to Social Economics (Xu 1934). In these works, Xu critically engaged with pressing issues of Chinese society, examining both the structure of the economy and the nature of religion through a lens that blended Western thought with local perspectives. His writings sought to synthesize Eastern and Western ideas, playing an active role in the modernization and globalization of Chinese intellectual traditions.

The publication of Revue Catholique remained uninterrupted until the onset of the Battle of Shanghai in 1937, when wartime conditions forced its cessation. In response to this challenge, Xu compiled over 300 of his previously published articles into a collection titled Thoughts and Essays 隨思隨筆 (Xu 1940; Starr 2016, pp. 100–27). This anthology, which includes a foreword by the esteemed diplomat Lu Zhengxiang 陸徵祥, showcases Xu’s intellectual versatility by addressing a wide range of topics from travel observations, such as “Chinese Books in the Bibliothèque nationale de France” 法京圖書館中之中國書, to critical reflections on wealth, culture, and the literary landscape in China. Additionally, the collection features several essays on translation, including discussions on the translation of Catholic texts and the challenges of cross-cultural communication, thus reflecting Xu’s deep engagement with the complexities of translation as a means of facilitating cultural exchange.

Xu’s position as the editor of Revue Catholique not only garnered critical acclaim but also established benchmarks for Catholic periodicals in China. Throughout his career, he explored translation practices and the unification of terminology, emphasizing the importance of these endeavors within the broader Jesuit educational tradition. This commitment is further illustrated in his promotion of an ethical and moral framework for publishing, which emphasizes the role of literature as a means of cultivating an informed and conscientious society.

Furthermore, Xu Zongze’s scholarly approach reveals a profound understanding of the interplay between translation, culture, and the flow of ideas, as evidenced in his works, including “On Ma Xiangbo’s Bible Translation” 九五叟譯聖經, “The Need for Unified Terms of Translation” 譯名宜統一, “Latinization of Chinese Characters” 漢字拉丁化, “Phonetic Resources for Aid to the Eyes and Ears of Western Literati” 西儒耳目資之拼音, and “Western Translations of the Four Books” 四書西譯. He recognized that translation is not merely a linguistic exercise but a vital process that influences perceptions and fosters dialogue within a complex societal framework. By evaluating his journalistic writings alongside his translation efforts, it is clear that Xu made substantial contributions to the cultural dialogue of his era, advocating for the integration of Western knowledge while remaining deeply rooted in the Chinese cultural context. His legacy continues to resonate within translation studies and cultural exchange, establishing him as a significant intellectual force in modernizing Chinese thought and advancing the Catholic mission in China. Through these endeavors, Xu Zongze exemplifies the transformative potential of translation in bridging cultural divides and enhancing mutual understanding across various intellectual traditions.

3. Xu Zongze’s Editorial Legacy and Theoretical Contributions

Xu Zongze’s tenure as chief editor of Revue Catholique during the 1920s and 1930s marked a transformative period in modern Chinese translation theory and practice. Under his editorial direction, the journal became a vital platform for introducing Latin and French religious texts to Chinese readers, fostering rich cross-cultural and intellectual exchange. Xu developed a rigorous framework for selecting and translating articles that resonated with Chinese intellectual discourse, adapting content to reflect the evolving demands of his readership while emphasizing both scholarly rigor and cross-cultural engagement.

In his landmark “Treatise on Translation” (1930), Xu articulated translation as a specialized discipline demanding not only linguistic mastery but also deep substantive knowledge (H. Wang 2005, pp. 89–94). He demonstrated how the successful dissemination of religious texts—from Buddhist scriptures such as those translated by Tang Xuanzang 唐玄奘 during the Tang Dynasty to Catholic literature produced by Jesuit missionaries in the Ming-Qing period—historically relied on translations produced by scholars possessing expertise in both source and target languages. Drawing on the insights of Ma Jianzhong 馬建忠, Liang Qichao 梁啟超, and Yan Fu 嚴複, Xu emphasized that translation extended far beyond mere bilingualism, advocating instead for clearly defined standards and systematic training (Q. Liang 1974, p. 775; Yan 2014, pp. 7–8; Ma 1994, pp. 224–29).

Xu’s understanding of translation talent and training was rooted in his conviction that translation required meticulous education and formation. Countering the prevailing notion that basic bilingual competence sufficed, he highlighted the profound complexity of the craft. In this, he aligned with Ma Jianzhong, who stressed the difficulty of mastering both Chinese and Western linguistic systems, as well as with Liang Qichao and Yan Fu, who emphasized the need for versatility, patience, and deep cultural proficiency to achieve translational excellence.

This theoretical foundation found institutional expression at Zi-ka-wei, a dynamic intellectual hub steeped in the legacy of Xu Guangqi’s maxim: “To surpass, one must synthesize; to synthesize, one must first translate.” 欲求超勝, 必須會通; 會通之前, 先須翻譯. The sense of urgency surrounding translation intensified after China’s defeat in the First Sino-Japanese War, prompting Ma Jianzhong to advocate for modern linguistic training and lay the groundwork for institutionalized translation education—a project Xu Zongze would later advance. Ma envisioned a Translation Academy modeled on Renaissance-era European academies, focused on both linguistic and scientific education rather than religious training (Ma 1994, pp. 224–29). His ideas contributed significantly to the founding of Aurora College, which implemented the innovative “Aurora Model.”

Building upon Ma’s vision, Xu Zongze proposed a Translation Academy based on a dual-curriculum model: one track for students proficient in Western languages, and another for those versed in Chinese literature. This approach aimed to cultivate translators capable of bridging linguistic and cultural divides. The resulting “Aurora Model” integrated Jesuit educational traditions with modern pedagogical needs, offering a curriculum strong in multilingual and scientific studies while emphasizing moral and intellectual formation. Developed in response to critiques of inconsistent practices at earlier institutions like the Shanghai Arsenal and T’ung-wen Kuan (F. Liang 2015), the model provided a systematic framework for translation education that sought to improve diplomatic and administrative efficiency while supporting China’s broader modernization.

Xu further advocated for government-supervised standardization of translation to ensure quality and coherence. Through his editorial work at Revue Catholique, he applied these principles to make Western knowledge both accessible and transformative within Chinese academic discourse. Together, the contributions of Ma and Xu at Zi-ka-wei reflect a strategic synthesis of classical and modern educational traditions, underscoring translation’s vital role in advancing cross-cultural understanding and supporting China’s intellectual modernization.

Xu’s methodological framework distinguished between literal translation and free translation, analyzing the trade-offs between fidelity and fluency. He further examined the stylistic choice between Classical Chinese and Vernacular Chinese, noting the former’s concision but potential obscurity. His practical criticism extended to prominent translators such as Yan Fu and Lin Shu 林紓 when he believed their methods impeded understanding (Xu 1930, p. 104). He observed that Yan’s pursuit of elegance in Classical Chinese occasionally led to abstruse language, while Lin’s liberal approach often compromised accuracy for narrative appeal.

Xu contended that translation approach should vary with genre: sacred texts and legal documents demanded strict literal fidelity—exemplified in his consistent use of “天主” (Tianzhu) for “God” in Catholic translations—while historical and narrative works permitted a more flexible sense-for-sense approach, as demonstrated in his renderings of Western church histories into Chinese historiographical style.

In terminology translation, Xu developed a principled approach emphasizing conceptual clarity over phonetic resemblance. While acknowledging the common rendering “邏輯” (luoji) for “Logique,” he preferred the semantic translation “論理學” (lunlixue, “study of reasoning”), arguing that it better captured the discipline’s epistemological nature and aligned with Chinese cognitive patterns. To institutionalize such practices, Xu proposed forming a “Committee for Standardized Translation Terms” to ensure consistency across translations.

Through these comprehensive efforts—encompassing theoretical innovation, pedagogical reform, and terminological standardization—Xu Zongze established translation as a crucial medium for ethical, intellectual, and cultural exchange between China and the West, providing a sustainable framework for cross-cultural understanding and intellectual modernization.

4. Jesuit Methods and Xu Zongze’s Translation System

The translation of terminology represents a foundational concern within translation studies, profoundly influencing how foreign concepts are perceived, assimilated, and naturalized in the target language (Zou 2012, pp. 5–7). Within the Chinese context, the persistent efforts toward terminology unification and adaptive accommodation—central to the Jesuit missionary strategy—reveal a continuous negotiation between linguistic innovation and ideological coherence. This section examines the evolution of these practices, with particular attention to the scholarly contributions of Xu Zongze through his editorial work in Revue Catholique and his systematic approach to philosophical translation.

The Jesuit translations produced at Zi-ka-wei emerged during a period of significant linguistic transformation in China, marked by intense interlingual contact among multiple language families. The Jesuits strategically treated classical and vernacular texts as “foreign language resources,” appropriating and adapting lexical and syntactic elements that ultimately spurred expressive innovation, grammatical modification, and even experiments with character romanization. These coined terms and phrases functioned as regulatory mechanisms that facilitated the incorporation of foreign ideas into Chinese intellectual discourse.

Xu Zongze’s assumption of the editorship of Revue Catholique in 1923 marked a deliberate advancement of this terminological project. Writing under the pen name Bao Zhen (抱真, “Embracing Truth”), he introduced the “New Terms” 新名詞 column, which sought to systematically introduce, explain, and contextualize foreign concepts. Each entry—such as his explication of “philosophy”—exceeded mere definition: it traced etymological roots (e.g., the Greek φιλοσοφία), contrasted Western and Chinese conceptual frameworks (e.g., zhexue 哲學 as “the study of wisdom”), and situated terms within a global intellectual history. Adopting a methodical structure—often organized around thesis statement, argumentation, and references—Xu transformed the column into an essential scholarly lexicon for Sino–Western exchange. He openly acknowledged existing inconsistencies in translated terminology and the often inelegant usage found in contemporary magazines and newspapers (Xu 1923, pp. 512–15).

Xu further demonstrated his rigorous approach in works such as Elementa Philosophi: Ethica seu Moralis 倫理學, where he examined 78 academic topics through structured themes including thesis development, argumentation, problem-solving, and references. Although grounded in Catholic ethics, his analysis employed social-scientific methodologies, reflecting his commitment to academic objectivity and conceptual clarity.

In the “New Terms” column, Xu defined ethics not through a theological lens but as “a branch of philosophy” aimed at “guiding human behavior according to correct order.” He distinguished between involuntary actions (shared with animals) and voluntary, morally significant “human actions” (acte humain), which include thought, speech, and deed. Crucially, he asserted that ethics is “based on reason, distinct from religious doctrine,” thereby delineating it from law, politics, and economics (Xu 1924, pp. 80–81). This framing reflects a strategic effort to decouple ethical philosophy from its religious associations and secure its place within a secular intellectual framework.

Xu’s scholarship extended to the history of philosophy, as seen in his Compendium de historia Philosophiae 哲學史綱, where he adopted a tripartite periodization—ancient (metaphysical and ethical inquiries), medieval (ethics and theology), and modern (scientific and social philosophy)—and emphasized paradigm shifts driven by intellectual dissatisfaction. He defined philosophy itself as the “love of wisdom,” invoking classical Chinese lexicography such as the Erya 爾雅 and Yang Xiong’s Fangyan 方言, while differentiating it from natural sciences by its pursuit of “ultimate principles” and profound truths.

In the Compendium Apologeticæ Generalis 探原課本, Xu engaged with fundamental questions of human origin, theology, and cognition, beginning from Descartes’ “cogito, ergo sum” and moving toward objective knowledge and divine relation. He introduced the “Association of Ideas” (Association des idées)—exploring contiguity, resemblance, and contrast—as a mechanism underlying modern theories like monism and phenomenology. This conceptual toolkit was not only expounded in his writings but also put into practice through the “New Terms” column, where he incorporated Latin and French-derived terminology to counter the growing influence of Sino-Japanese vocabulary and broaden the conceptual horizons of his readers.

Through these multifaceted efforts, Xu Zongze established a coherent framework for terminology translation that balanced phonetic borrowing, semantic construction, and philosophical contextualization. His work exemplifies how translation serves as a form of conceptual integration—one that is deeply enmeshed in cultural identity, intellectual history, and the politics of knowledge.

5. Xu Zongze’s Further Advocacy for a Catholic Translation Society

In January 1934, Xu Zongze published a comprehensive essay titled “My Views on Advocating for a Catholic Translation Society” 提倡公教譯社的我見 in Revue Catholique, which stands as a seminal text in the history of modern Chinese translation theory and Catholic intellectual history. This nearly 3000-word treatise not only outlined a practical plan for institutionalizing Catholic translation work but also engaged deeply with questions of cultural appropriation, religious localization, and the ethics of knowledge production in a colonial context.

Xu’s argument developed through three sophisticated dimensions that reflected both historical awareness and contemporary engagement. First, he provided a nuanced re-examination of the Jesuit missionary enterprise during the late Ming and early Qing dynasties, analyzing how the generation of giants (Dunne 1962) had strategically employed Western scientific knowledge as cultural capital to gain access to Chinese literati circles. This historical analysis served as more than mere background—it constituted a conscious effort to reclaim what Lydia Liu has termed “the Protestant monopoly on translation modernity” by emphasizing the Catholic legacy in Sino–Western cultural exchange (Liu 1995, p. 5). Xu argued that publishing ventures had been essential to the Jesuits’ strategy of cultural accommodation, enabling them to establish academic credibility while simultaneously advancing religious propagation.

Second, Xu addressed the complex intellectual landscape of 1930s China, characterized by “an intellectual marketplace of competing ideologies.” (Grieder 1981, pp. 6–7). In this vibrant yet contentious environment, Xu recognized that the rising demand for new knowledge systems created both challenges and opportunities for Catholic intellectual engagement. His advocacy for modern publications reflected a sophisticated understanding of what Jürgen Habermas would later theorize as the “public sphere”—a space where religious voices needed to participate actively to shape cultural discourse. Xu perceived that in periods of national transformation, print media became crucial sites for preserving cultural heritage while simultaneously introducing innovative ideas.

Third, Xu emphasized the cultivation of translation talent through a project of “religious formation through linguistic training.” Drawing on the Jesuits’ own Ratio Studiorum educational philosophy, he proposed a systematic approach to training translators who would be equally grounded in Catholic theology and Chinese literary traditions. This emphasis on contemporary understandings of translation as cultural mediation rather than mere linguistic transfer.

Xu’s examination of contemporary publishing models, particularly the Shanghai Commercial Press, demonstrated his keen awareness of the material conditions of knowledge production. His analysis of audience segmentation strategies—catering to students, women, professionals through various periodical formats—revealed a modern marketing sensibility unusual among religious figures of his time. This commercial awareness, however, was always tempered by his theological commitments. As he argued, the influx of Western knowledge required careful mediation through what he termed “the lens of religious ethics,” suggesting a critique of what he perceived as the value-neutral pretensions of secular modernity.

The organizational blueprint Xu proposed for the Translation Society reflected both practical acumen and theological vision. His detailed attention to urban location, funding structures, and personnel recruitment revealed an understanding of institution-building that combined business management with religious mission. The proposed structure—with a chief director, subject specialists, and integrated printing facilities—anticipated what contemporary scholars would recognize as a knowledge ecosystem, where translation, publication, and distribution formed an integrated cultural apparatus.

A particularly significant aspect of Xu’s proposal was his ethical framework for publications. His distinction between “negative method” (correcting errors) and “positive strategy” (promoting sound doctrine) reflected what Michel Foucault would later analyze as the productive nature of power—the ability to not just prohibit but to create new forms of knowledge and subjectivity. This ethical concern extended to his critique of commercial publishers whom he accused of “pandering to society’s base instincts,” language that echoed contemporary debates about cultural commodification.

Xu’s emphasis on the untranslated Bible and the shortage of Chinese Catholic literature pointed to “invisibility” of religious translation in modern China. This recognition of the unequal flow of religious knowledge revealed Xu’s awareness of the power dynamics inherent in cultural translation, particularly to “write back” against colonial knowledge systems (Niranjana 1992, p. 3).

The proposed knowledge network that Xu envisioned—connecting existing Catholic publishing houses across China—anticipated contemporary theories of knowledge infrastructure that emphasize the importance of coordination, standardization, and scalability in cultural production. His focus on training local editorial talent through what amounted to an apprenticeship model demonstrated his commitment to sustainable institutional development rather than short-term missionary gains.

Through this multifaceted proposal, Xu Zongze articulated a vision of translation that was simultaneously theological, cultural, and political. His work represents an adaptation to modern organizational methods while maintaining distinct theological commitments. At the same time, Xu’s proposal can be read as a “regime of translation” (Naoki 1991, p. 2)—a comprehensive system for managing the encounter between Chinese culture and Catholic doctrine that acknowledged the power imbalances while seeking to create spaces for meaningful exchange.

Xu’s advocacy for the Catholic Translation Society thus stands as a significant document in the global history of religious translation, offering insights into how religious communities navigate the challenges of modernity while maintaining theological integrity. It represents a sophisticated attempt to create a hybrid space of cultural negotiation—where Catholic and Chinese traditions could meet without either being subsumed by the other.

6. Concluding Remarks

Xu Zongze plays a pivotal role in the development of modern Chinese translation, significantly shaping the intellectual landscape through his multifaceted contributions. Leveraging the rich tradition of Chinese translations from the Ming and Qing dynasties along with his classical education, Xu navigated interlingual translation with skill. His initiatives, such as the “New Terms” column and the advocacy for a Catholic Translation Society, reflect his understanding of the complexities of cultural exchange and the importance of a systematic approach to translating moral and philosophical concepts.

Xu’s critiques of ideologically driven publications and his insights into the translation of philosophical terminology reveal a keen awareness of the interplay between language, culture, and power. He emphasized the need for a robust publishing strategy and the cultivation of translation talent to further localize Catholic teachings within the Chinese context.

Through his work, Xu highlighted the dynamic interactions between Chinese and foreign cultures and the transformations in political and intellectual thought. By focusing on ethical considerations in publishing, Xu aimed to foster an informed society. His translation philosophy, explored through his editorial work at Revue Catholique, provides valuable insights into the complexities of translation and cultural exchange in late modern China, marking his significant contributions to the field and enriching the study of 20th-century Chinese translation history.