From Sacred Doctrine to Confucian Moral Practice: Giulio Aleni’s Cross-Cultural Interpretation of “Goodness and Evil of Human Nature”

Comments 1: The idea by Mencius and Confucius about the nature of human beings could be supported with more citations from the Classics.

Response 1: Thanks for your kind suggestions, which is valuable for improving the accuracy of the manuscript. More discussions by Mencius and Confucius have been included in the revised manuscript.

These added ideas can be found on page 4 in red:

More ideas by Confucius about the nature of human beings (with citations from The Analects): (Line 158-172, page 4)

“The innate nature of a person thus is often manifested through a natural propensity for corresponding virtues, and the central concern of Confucius was to distinguish the caliber of scholars based on their personal innate preferences and inclinations, and based on these differences, he emphasized the importance of learning acquired later in life, thereby guiding the path to moral cultivation that is applicable to the individual:

There is the love of knowing without the love of learning - the beclouding here leads to dissipation of mind. There is the love of being sincere without the love of learning - the beclouding here leads to an injurious disregard of consequences. There is the love of straightforwardness without the love of learning -the beclouding here leads to rudeness. There is the love of boldness without the love of learning - the beclouding here leads to insubordination. There is the love of firmness without the love of learning - the beclouding here leads to extravagant conduct.好仁不好學，其蔽也愚；好知不好學，其蔽也蕩；好信不好學，其蔽也賊；好直不好學，其蔽也絞；好勇不好學，其蔽也亂；好剛不好學，其蔽也狂。(The Analects: Yang Huo论语·阳货 17-8)” 

More ideas by Mencius about the nature of human beings: (Line 179-200, page 4)

①　“Also, “Benevolence, righteousness, self-consecration, and fidelity, with unwearied joy in these virtues; these constitute the nobility of Heaven仁義忠信，樂善不倦，此天爵也(Gao Zi I孟子·告子上 11-16）”, that is to say, the inherent nature of benevolence and righteousness is a kind of dignity and honor bestowed upon humans by Heaven.”

②　“Moreover, Mencius’s concept of nature specifically refers to the innate disposition that guides individuals toward goodness or the attainment of sagehood and virtue.”

③　“Mencius greatly extolled the moral nature of humans, namely, “All men may be Yaos and Shuns人皆可以為堯舜 (Mencius: Gao Zi II孟子·告子下 12-22)”, and articulated a profound emphasis on valuing, respecting, and trusting in the developmental potential of individuals.”

④　“Furthermore, Mencius stated, “I understand words. I am skilful in nourishing my vast, flowing passion-nature我善養吾浩然之氣.” (Mencius: Gong Sun Chou I孟子·公孙丑上 3-22), the quality of goodness is associated with qi (氣), and may indeed be constituted by it.” 

Comments 2: Some citations present in the notes do not appear in the references.

Response 2: We sincerely appreciate the valuable comments. We have checked the literature carefully in the notes and add all these citations in the references in the revised manuscript.

These citations can be found in the references in red: (Page 17-18)

“Hacker, Peter. 2020. The Moral Powers: A study of Human Nature. NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.

Ivanhoe, Philip. 2016. Preface: Two Schools of Neo-Confucianism, in Three Streams: Confucian Reflections on Learning and the Moral Heart-Mind in China, Korea, and Japan. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Lewens, Tim. 2017. Human Nature, Human Culture: The Case of Cultural Evolution. Interface Focus: A Theme Supplement of Journal of the Royal Society Interface 7(5), 20170018.

Liu, JeeLoo. 2017. Neo-Confucianism: Metaphysics, Mind, and Morality. NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.

Meynard, Thierry. Pan, Dawei. 2020. A Brief Introduction to the Study of Human Nature, Leiden/Boston: Brill.”

Comments 3: When Mencius’ and Confucius’ works are cited it is not clear from which verse they are taken and it’s not stated if the English translation is by the author, I suggest to clarify this point.

Response 3: Thanks for your excellent comments, which is highly appreciated. We have modified this through the following steps:

1) We have clarified that (see Note 3, page 17) the English translations of Confucius’ and Mencius’ works in this paper are quoted from the British Sinologist James Legge’s The Chinese Classics, namely Legge, James. 1869. The Chinese Classics: Translated into English with Preliminary Essays and Explanatory, Vol. 1. The Life and Teachings of Confucius. Second Edition. London: N. Trübner; Legge, James. 1875. The Chinese Classics: Translated into English with Preliminary Essays and Explanatory, Vol. 2 The Life and Teachings of Mencius. London: N. Trübner.

2) We have carefully examined each quotation and revised the improper translation based on James Legge’s version. And for each quotation, we have added the verse they are taken respectively.

These modifications can be found basically on page 4 in red:

About The Analects:

①　“His discourses about man’s nature, and the way of Heaven, cannot be heard.夫子之言性與天道，不可得而聞也” (The Analects: Gong Ye Chang论语·公冶长 5-13).  

②　“Man is born for uprightness.人之生也直” (The Analects: Yong Xe论语·雍也 6-19).

③　“By nature, men are nearly alike; by practice, they get to be wide apart.性相近也，習相遠也” (The Analects: Yang Huo论语·阳货 17-2).

About Mencius:

①　“The feeling of commiseration belongs to all men; so does that of shame and dislike; and that of reverence and respect; and that of approving and disapproving.惻隱之心人皆有之，羞惡之心人皆有之，恭敬之心人皆有之，是非之心人皆有之” (Mencius: Gao Zi I孟子·告子上 11-6).”

②　“Benevolence, righteousness, self-consecration, and fidelity, with unwearied joy in these virtues; these constitute the nobility of Heaven仁義忠信，樂善不倦，此天爵也” (Mencius: Gao Zi I孟子·告子上 11-16）

③　“The ability possessed by men without having been acquired by learning is intuitive ability, and the knowledge possessed by them without the exercise of thought is their intuitive knowledge人之所不學而能者其良能也，所不慮而知者其良知也” (Mencius: Jin Xin I孟子·尽心上 13-15).

④　“All men may be Yaos and Shuns人皆可以為堯舜 (Mencius: Gao Zi II孟子·告子下 12-22)

⑤　“I understand words. I am skilful in nourishing my vast, flowing passion-nature我善養吾浩然之氣.” (Mencius: Gong Sun Chou I孟子·公孙丑上 3-22)

⑥　“to subdue one’s self and return to propriety, is perfect virtue. If a man can for one day subdue himself and return to propriety, all under heaven will ascribe perfect virtue to him. Is the practice of perfect virtue from a man himself, or is it from others? 克己復禮為仁。一日克己復禮，天下歸仁焉！為仁由己，而由人乎哉？” (The Analects: Yan Yuan 论语·顏淵 12-1)

Comments 4: Line 545-546 is not clear, please reorganise the sentence.

Response 4: Thank you for pointing this out. We have made the change. The new sentences read as follows (Revised: Line 702-705, page 14):

“Therefore, Aleni emphasized the impartiality of God’s judgment, emphasizing that God’s assessment of actions of human being is fair and unbiased; and in judgment, God displays his holy and just character in punishing the wicked:”

Comments 5: If single key words in Chinese are cited I suggest to add Pinyin and use italics for transcription.

Response 5: Agree. We have, accordingly, added Pinyin with italics for single cited key words in Chinese, including:

“ultimate good (zhishan 至善)”“self-mastery (zizhuan 自專)”“sharpening (dili 砥礪)” “overcoming nature (kexing 克性)” (Line 11-12, page 1)

the virtuous beginnings (shanduan 善端) (Line 179, page 4)

School of Mind (xinxue 心學) (Line 233, page 5)

School of Pragmatism (shixue 实學) (Line 235, page 5)

Neo-Confucianism (lixue 理學) (Line 236, page 5)

“principle” (li 理) (Line 226, page 5)

energy (qi 氣) (Line 195, page 4)

“will (yizhi 意誌)” (Line 382, page 8)

“capable of good” (keweishan 可為善) (Line 387, page 8)

Doing Good (weishan 為善) (Line 426, page 9)

“Skilled Governance (shanyu 善禦)” (Line 426, page 9)

 “following one’s nature (shuaixing 率性) (Line 489, page 10)

the Way (Dao 道) (Line 490, page 10)

4. Response to Comments on the Quality of English Language

Point 1: English language fine. No issues detected.

Response 1: Thank you very much! We tried our best to improve the language quality again and made some changes to the manuscript. These changes do not influence the content and framework of the paper. And here we did not list the changes but marked in red in the revised paper. We appreciate for your warm work earnestly.

5. Additional clarifications

Clarification 1:

During our thorough readings of the manuscript, we find that in the end of Section 3.1, an important idea that “original righteousness” (yuanyi 原義) occupies a position analogous to the Confucian concept of “supreme good (zhishan 至善)” is mentioned, as a crucial point for the part 3 even a foundation for the whole article, but we did not give a clear illustration. Thus, a short paragraph is added as a detailed explanation to the statement “This largely allows for the possibility of a convergence between Catholic ethics and traditional Confucian ethics at their foundational levels”: (Line 348-371, page 7-8)

“Firstly, both emphasize the innate moral consciousness, that is, the inherent human capacity to comprehend justice and perform good deeds. The difference is that Aleni sees “spirituality” as the original gift from God to humanity, enabling people to understand and practice moral commandments, while Confucianism posits that the “ultimate good” is rooted in human nature, reflecting the inherent goodness of human nature. Secondly, spirituality and the “ultimate good” both form the basis of moral action. Aleni believes that spirituality serves as a bridge between humans and God, and by following God’s commandments, one can achieve moral self-perfection. Similarly, Confucianism advocates for the cultivation of moral virtues such as benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, and faithfulness to reach the state of the “ultimate good.” Thirdly, both possess characteristics of transcendence and immanence. Spirituality and the “ultimate good” are not only manifestations of an individual's internal moral sense but also represent a spiritual pursuit beyond everyday life. They point to a state of spiritual perfection that transcends the material world, reflecting humanity’s aspiration for noble moral values. The profound similarities in moral philosophy not only demonstrate the commonalities in moral pursuits of the two ideological systems but also reflect Aleni’s deep insight and wisdom in cross-cultural communication.”

Clarification 2:

In the manuscript you have reviewed, it seems that the long conclusions are not thoroughly supported by the results presented in the article, therefore, we streamline the conclusion part and shift some to the discussion part, here is the revised conclusion part: (Line 774-792, page 16) 

“In summary, Giulio Aleni’s legacy integrates religious ethics into Chinese culture with a transformative approach that combining Confucius moral practices with theological abstractions. By aligning with Neo-Confucianism, Aleni’s work bridged Catholic moral teachings with Chinese ethics, enhancing the cultural integration of Catholicism. His emphasis on the cultural dimensions of ethics provided a pragmatic framework for intercultural dialogue, enriching societal norms and promoting individual moral cultivation. Specifically, his perspective corrected ethical deficiencies of Confucianism by affirming human nature’s innate goodness within a Christian context, offering a unique role for Catholicism in rectifying social values. His synthesis of Catholic doctrines such as “original sin” “spirituality” “redemption” “sanctification” with Confucian “innate goodness”, “self-mastery”, “sharpening”, and “overcoming nature” laid a theoretical foundation for  the sanctity and practicality of ethics. His cultural nexus between Christian and Confucian ethics positioned ethical issues within a broader cultural domain, fostering mutual understanding and dialogue. His work converges ethical virtues with religious faith, demonstrating the potential for traditions to engage in meaningful discourse while pursuing moral and spiritual excellence. This way of integration retains significant implications not only for the reciprocal development and effective exchange between Christianity and Confucianism in contemporary contexts, but also for the mutual benefits and the constructive dialogue between heterogeneous cultures.”

Comments 1: Suggest the authors enhance the motivation for this work and also improve the literature review part.

Response 1: Thank you very much for your constructive suggestions, which is valuable for improving the accuracy, integrity and consistency of the manuscript. Based on your guidance, we have:

①　Emphasized the motivation for this work in the beginning of the manuscript (Line 43-53, page 1-2)

“The work of Aleni serves as a historical case study that exemplifies the complexities and possibilities of cross-cultural communication in the realm of religion and moral philosophy. Accordingly, by examining Aleni’s interpretations of human nature, this study endeavors to bridge gaps in understanding by elucidating the commonalities and divergences in ethical and philosophical thought across traditions, thereby shedding light on the cross-cultural and inter-religious dialogue and development. It underscores the importance of intercultural understanding and the potential for reciprocal communication between different belief systems. This paper is also motivated by a desire to enrich the academic discourse on the intersection of religion and morality, seeking to contribute to the discussion on the universality of moral values and the particularities of their expression within distinct traditions.”

②　Added a paragraph of literature review in the introduction part, with more related works are cited and evaluated, and the necessity of this study emphasized: (Line 54-80, page 2)

“A substantial body of scholarly work exists that delves into Giulio Aleni’s interpretation of “nature” and “soul”, presenting a multitude of divergent viewpoints and analytical frameworks. Recent studies have highlighted Aleni's approach to harmonizing Christian doctrines with Chinese Confucian culture, as evidenced in his works such as A Brief Introduction to the Study of Human Nature (Xingxue cushu性學觕述) (Zhu, 2024. Lin, 2020. Dong, 2015) and The True Source of the Myriad Things (Wanwu zhenyuan 萬物真原) (Hosle and Dai, 2024). These studies underscore Aleni’s methodological ingenuity in adopting and adapting Confucian concepts to convey Christian principles centering on the issue of human nature, thereby facilitating a cross-cultural dialogue. Meynard and Pan’s annotated work (2020) offers insights into his philosophical and theological perspectives on the soul's relationship with the heart and brain. Also, researchers such as Lü, et al (2019) scrutinize Aleni’s cultural adaptation strategies, revealing his recognition of parallels between Catholicism and early Confucian thought, especially concerning the supreme deity and ethical frameworks. Song (2018) presents an innovative “dialogic hybridization” framework, analyzing the Kouduo richao to understand the formation of a hybrid Christian-Confucian identity through Aleni’s interactions with Chinese literati. While these works collectively advance our understanding of Aleni’s mission and the cultural exchanges of his time, there is a clear need for a focused examination of his perspective on the goodness and evil of human nature: to date, scholarly investigations specifically dedicated to the discourse on this issue (distinct from the subject of “nature” as an umbrella term, see note 1) remain relatively sparse in the academic domain. Meanwhile, in addition to the aforementioned two works, Giulio Aleni’s other writings engage in a profoundly insightful discussion and integration of human nature, which merits scholarly investigation as well. In this study, the discussion predominantly draws upon two additional books (co-)authored by Aleni, Diary of Oral Admonitions (Kouduo richao口鐸日抄) and Recording of the Discussion on Learning in Fuzhou (Sanshan lunxueji三山論學記), serving as the foundational texts for analysis.”

References of this paragraph: (Page 17-18) 

Dong, Shaoxin. 2015. The Introduction of Aristotle’s Soul Theory in the Late Ming: Giulio Aleni’s General Introduction to the Learning on Human Nature. In Studies in the Introduction of Western Learning into China, edited by Center for the Introduction of Western Learning into China, Beijing: The Commercial Press[Shangwu yinshuguan], pp: 40-41.

Hosle, Paul. Dai, Biyun. 2024. Scholastic Metaphysics in Late Ming China: Giulio Aleni's "The True Source of the Myriad Things. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Lin, Yuehui. 2020. Anima and soulual nature: The encounter between Giulio Aleni’s A brief introduction to the study of human nature and Neo-Confucianism. Universitas: Monthly Review of Philosophy and Culture 47: 57-74. 

Lü, Bianting. Liu, Jianguo. Huang, Luyu. 2019. Giulio Aleni’s Adaption and Interpretation of Chinese Confucian Culture. Higher Education of Social Science 17: 50-54.

Meynard, Thierry, and Pan, Dawei. 2020. A Brief Introduction to the Study of Human Nature, Lei den/Boston: Brill.

Song, Gang. 2018. Giulio Aleni, Kouduo richao, and Christian-Confucian Dialogism in Late Ming Fujian. New York: Routledge.

Zhu, Hailin. 2024. Transwriting in Aleni’s Xingxue cushu: Communicating the Philosophy of Human Nature between the West and late Ming China. Intellectual History Review, 34(3), 577–593.

Comments 2: Suggest the authors supply some schematic, graph, or pic to make it more readable.

Response 2: We fully agree with your suggestion! Schematic and graph obviously will make the article more concise, succinct, and understandable. Therefore, to help readers better understand the key points of this paper, in the end of discussion part, we added a figure/ model to summarize Aleni’s cross-cultural and inter-religious interpretation strategy (see below). We also possess some images pertinent to our study, such as the picture of the cover of Aleni’s works and the image of Aleni’s tomb in Fujian, China. However, given the standards of academic journal, we are uncertain if these images will be deemed acceptable for Religions. Should you and the editor later deem them suitable or necessary, we would be more than willing to insert these pictures into the manuscript to further improve the article’s readability.

The added figure and its related information in the text: (Line 769-772, page 15)

“Thus, looking holistically at Aleni’s practice, from a cultural exchange perspective, his cross-cultural interpretive strategy can be summarized as follows:

Figure 1 Giulio Aleni’s Cross-Cultural Interpretation Model”

Comments 3: Suggest the authors supply more detail in sentences about why explaining the issue of “original sin” in a way that integrates with traditional Confucian thought became a significant challenge for Aleni.

Response 3: Thanks for your excellent comments, as it clearly holds significant importance for solidifying the foundation of the article’s argumentation. We have added a paragraph as an important part in the beginning of part 3: (Line 247-277, page 5-6)

“The discourse on the nature of humanity, as delineated by Eastern and Western belief systems, reveals a profound and multifaceted distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic, as well as subjective and objective dimensions. Eastern belief system, in their exploration of human morality, is inclined to accentuate the intimate nexus between the concepts of good and evil with the innermost inclinations and connections of the individual. Within this framework, moral judgments are not perceived as external impositions but emerge from the depths of the individual’s volitional choices and the quest for intrinsic values. Conversely, Western religious traditions place greater emphasis on the objectivity and universality of the concepts of good and evil. Within Western religious contexts, the dichotomy of good and evil is considered an integral part of cosmic order and natural law, representing moral principles to which the human soul and will ought to conform. More specifically, the “original sin” initially found difficulty in being embraced by traditional Chinese Confucian thought, given the Confucian emphasis on the inherent goodness of human nature. Within the Confucian intellectual tradition, the human being is regarded as possessing an intrinsic goodness and the potential for moral perfection, achievable through dedicated effort and the adherence to social and ethical norms. The Christian concept of “original sin,” which posits an inherited and universal human flaw, stands in stark contrast to this sanguine perspective on human nature, thereby complicating its integration into Confucian doctrine. As mentioned above, Confucianism assigns paramount significance to the individual’s moral responsibility and agency, advocating for self-directed cultivation of virtue and contributions to societal harmony. The Christian doctrine of “original sin” suggests an inherent limitation of moral agency due to a sinful human nature, which appears to contravene the Confucian valorization of personal responsibility and the self-cultivation of virtue. Furthermore, while Christianity offers redemption from “original sin” through the salvific work of Jesus Christ, Confucianism lacks a soteriological framework predicated on the need for salvation from sin. Confucianism is in-stead concentrated on the development of moral character and the pursuit of social harmony. Consequently, the introduction of a Christian soteriological solution into the Confucian intellectual system necessitates a profound reinterpretation and synthesis of the two philosophical systems, ensuring that the integration is both theologically coherent and philosophically consistent with Confucian principles. The positioning of human nature is the starting point for ethical and moral considerations, and only a consensus can lead to a convergence. Therefore, explaining the issue of “original sin” in a way that integrates with traditional Confucian thought became a significant challenge for Aleni.”

Comments 4: Suggest the authors streamline the conclusion part and shift some to the discussion part.

Response 4: We sincerely appreciate your valuable comments. Refining the concluding section will render the finale more assertive and lucid. So we have:

①　Streamlined the conclusion part: (Line 774-792, page 16)

“In summary, Giulio Aleni’s legacy integrates religious ethics into Chinese culture with a transformative approach that combining Confucius moral practices with theological abstractions. By aligning with Neo-Confucianism, Aleni’s work bridged Catholic moral teachings with Chinese ethics, enhancing the cultural integration of Catholicism. His emphasis on the cultural dimensions of ethics provided a pragmatic framework for intercultural dialogue, enriching societal norms and promoting individual moral cultivation. Specifically, his perspective corrected ethical deficiencies of Confucianism by affirming human nature’s innate goodness within a Christian context, offering a unique role for Catholicism in rectifying social values. His synthesis of Catholic doctrines such as “original sin” “spirituality” “redemption” “sanctification” with Confucian “innate goodness”, “self-mastery”, “sharpening”, and “overcoming nature” laid a theoretical foundation for  the sanctity and practicality of ethics. His cultural nexus between Christian and Confucian ethics positioned ethical issues within a broader cultural domain, fostering mutual understanding and dialogue. His work converges ethical virtues with religious faith, demonstrating the potential for traditions to engage in meaningful discourse while pursuing moral and spiritual excellence. This way of integration retains significant implications not only for the reciprocal development and effective exchange between Christianity and Confucianism in contemporary contexts, but also for the mutual benefits and the constructive dialogue between heterogeneous cultures.”

②　Shifted some to the discussion part: (See the changes in red in corresponding pages)

a. The main contents of the first part of conclusion has been shifted to “3.2 Human Nature as A Moral Issue and the Impetus of Confucian Morality”, especially to 3.2.2., because most of this paragraph summarizes that Aleni’s work demonstrates that ethical practice is key to integrating religion into Chinese culture, shifting from theology to practical ethics, which is precisely the focal point of the argument and the contribution repeatedly emphasized in section 3.2. Also, a few lines of the first part deals with how Aleni delineated a domain for the “innate goodness” while also retaining the concept of “original sin”, so we remove this part to the end of 3.1.

b. The main contents of the second part of conclusion has been shifted to “3.2.3. The Power of Religious Doctrine: as the Confucian Practical Impetus”, because this paragraph highlights the contribution of Catholic doctrine and perspectives to the ethical motivations in Neo-Confucianism, which is a summary and deepening of the main theme of section 3.2.3.

c. The main contents of the third part of conclusion has been shifted to “3.3 Transcending Confucianism: Ultimate Concern and the Transcendence”, as it summarizes a theocentric and extroverted form of transcendence, in line with the theme of section 3.3 even the overall topic of Section 3.

4. Response to Comments on the Quality of English Language

Point 1: I am not qualified to assess the quality of English in this paper.

Response 1:  Thank you! We tried our best to improve the language quality again and made some changes to the manuscript. These changes do not influence the content and framework of the paper. And here we did not list the changes but marked in red in the revised paper. We appreciate for your warm work earnestly.

5. Additional clarifications

During our thorough readings of the manuscript, we find that in the end of Section 3.1, an important idea that “original righteousness” (yuanyi 原義) occupies a position analogous to the Confucian concept of “supreme good (zhishan 至善)” is mentioned, as a crucial point for the part 3 even a foundation for the whole article, but we did not give a clear illustration. Thus, a short paragraph is added as a detailed explanation to the statement “This largely allows for the possibility of a convergence between Catholic ethics and traditional Confucian ethics at their foundational levels”:  (Line 348-371, page 7-8)

“Firstly, both emphasize the innate moral consciousness, that is, the inherent human capacity to comprehend justice and perform good deeds. The difference is that Aleni sees “spirituality” as the original gift from God to humanity, enabling people to understand and practice moral commandments, while Confucianism posits that the “ultimate good” is rooted in human nature, reflecting the inherent goodness of human nature. Secondly, spirituality and the “ultimate good” both form the basis of moral action. Aleni believes that spirituality serves as a bridge between humans and God, and by following God’s commandments, one can achieve moral self-perfection. Similarly, Confucianism advocates for the cultivation of moral virtues such as benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, and faithfulness to reach the state of the “ultimate good.” Thirdly, both possess characteristics of transcendence and immanence. Spirituality and the “ultimate good” are not only manifestations of an individual's internal moral sense but also represent a spiritual pursuit beyond everyday life. They point to a state of spiritual perfection that transcends the material world, reflecting humanity’s aspiration for noble moral values. The profound similarities in moral philosophy not only demonstrate the commonalities in moral pursuits of the two ideological systems but also reflect Aleni’s deep insight and wisdom in cross-cultural communication.”

Comments 1: Very interesting. Congratulations.

Response 1: Thank you very much for your positive recommendation!

Response to Comments on the Quality of English Language

Point 1: I am not qualified to assess the quality of English in this paper.

Response 1: Thank you! We tried our best to improve the language quality again and made some changes to the manuscript. These changes do not influence the content and framework of the paper. And here we did not list the changes but marked in red in the revised paper. We appreciate for your warm work earnestly.

Additional clarifications

Clarification 1:

During our thorough readings of the manuscript, we find that in the end of Section 3.1, an important idea that “original righteousness” (yuanyi 原義) occupies a position analogous to the Confucian concept of “supreme good (zhishan 至善)” is mentioned, as a crucial point for the part 3 even a foundation for the whole article, but we did not give a clear illustration. Thus, a short paragraph is added as a detailed explanation to the statement “This largely allows for the possibility of a convergence between Catholic ethics and traditional Confucian ethics at their foundational levels”: (Line 348-371, page 7-8)

“Firstly, both emphasize the innate moral consciousness, that is, the inherent human capacity to comprehend justice and perform good deeds. The difference is that Aleni sees “spirituality” as the original gift from God to humanity, enabling people to understand and practice moral commandments, while Confucianism posits that the “ultimate good” is rooted in human nature, reflecting the inherent goodness of human nature. Secondly, spirituality and the “ultimate good” both form the basis of moral action. Aleni believes that spirituality serves as a bridge between humans and God, and by following God’s commandments, one can achieve moral self-perfection. Similarly, Confucianism advocates for the cultivation of moral virtues such as benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, and faithfulness to reach the state of the “ultimate good.” Thirdly, both possess characteristics of transcendence and immanence. Spirituality and the “ultimate good” are not only manifestations of an individual's internal moral sense but also represent a spiritual pursuit beyond everyday life. They point to a state of spiritual perfection that transcends the material world, reflecting humanity’s aspiration for noble moral values. The profound similarities in moral philosophy not only demonstrate the commonalities in moral pursuits of the two ideological systems but also reflect Aleni’s deep insight and wisdom in cross-cultural communication.”

Clarification 2:

In the manuscript you have reviewed, it seems that the long conclusions are not thoroughly supported by the results presented in the article, therefore, we streamline the conclusion part and shift some to the discussion part, here is the revised conclusion part: (Line 774-792, page 16) 

“In summary, Giulio Aleni’s legacy integrates religious ethics into Chinese culture with a transformative approach that combining Confucius moral practices with theological abstractions. By aligning with Neo-Confucianism, Aleni’s work bridged Catholic moral teachings with Chinese ethics, enhancing the cultural integration of Catholicism. His emphasis on the cultural dimensions of ethics provided a pragmatic framework for intercultural dialogue, enriching societal norms and promoting individual moral cultivation. Specifically, his perspective corrected ethical deficiencies of Confucianism by affirming human nature’s innate goodness within a Christian context, offering a unique role for Catholicism in rectifying social values. His synthesis of Catholic doctrines such as “original sin” “spirituality” “redemption” “sanctification” with Confucian “innate goodness”, “self-mastery”, “sharpening”, and “overcoming nature” laid a theoretical foundation for  the sanctity and practicality of ethics. His cultural nexus between Christian and Confucian ethics positioned ethical issues within a broader cultural domain, fostering mutual understanding and dialogue. His work converges ethical virtues with religious faith, demonstrating the potential for traditions to engage in meaningful discourse while pursuing moral and spiritual excellence. This way of integration retains significant implications not only for the reciprocal development and effective exchange between Christianity and Confucianism in contemporary contexts, but also for the mutual benefits and the constructive dialogue between heterogeneous cultures.”