본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

라그르네(Lagrené)와 耆英의 天主敎 認識 硏究 ― 天主敎 弛禁 協商(1844-1846)을 중심으로 ―

A Study on Perception of Catholic of Lagrené and Qiying ― Focusing on the Negotiation(1844-1846) of Legalization of Catholic ―

1

조회

0

다운로드

2

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류역사학

초록

Chinese people in the past had a strong Confucian traditional idea that religions are politically dangerous because they foster social unrest. Accordingly, Christianity was the most important object to be ostracized among challenges by the East in the 19th century. To the Qing Dynasty, western countries are aggressor nations and missionary workers were also westerners. Therefore, their missionary work by illegally sneaking into the interior of China was a big threat to the Qing Dynasty’s reign. And the Qing Dynasty considered Catholic potential anti-Qing power breaking social orders seriously. Qiying recognized Catholic under the Qing Dynasty’s basic perception. Although Qiying agreed on legalization of Catholic as a member of outside negotiation fraction, he has similar perception of Catholic to the prohibition period of Catholic. The only thing he wanted was to have westerners stay within the five ports anyway, and to control the people’s Christianity by regarding them as illegal believers. Although Catholic of Chinese people was allowed according to Emperor Dao-guang’s order, perception of the Qing Dynasty for Catholic was nearly the same as the prohibition period. Further, restricted policies of Christianity had been implemented according to this perception until the Tianjin-Beijing Treaty. France that had been a traditional Catholic protector for a long time began establishing its tradition as a Chinese Catholic protector by dispatching missionary workers of Society of Jesus to China in the Louis XⅣ period. France’s protection of Chinese Catholic was its tradition and duty, and it has intention to get political authority and fame in China. Under this political heritage, Lagrené tried to become a protector of Chinese Catholic for himself without instructions of the government. Lagrené who focused on his sense of duty as a protector of Chinese Catholic without understanding of Chinese traditional Confucian society and the long-term prohibition period by the Qing Dynasty created a foundation for the French protectorate over Catholic missions in China in the 19th century which originated from the Louis XⅣ period. As a matter of fact, France’s missionary policy in the 19th century focused on political authority and a duty as a Catholic protector on the foundation made by him irrespective of the monarchical period or the republican period in France. Therefore it is possible to say that anti-Christian movement against it shook China in the 19th century.

Abstract

Chinese people in the past had a strong Confucian traditional idea that religions are politically dangerous because they foster social unrest. Accordingly, Christianity was the most important object to be ostracized among challenges by the East in the 19th century. To the Qing Dynasty, western countries are aggressor nations and missionary workers were also westerners. Therefore, their missionary work by illegally sneaking into the interior of China was a big threat to the Qing Dynasty’s reign. And the Qing Dynasty considered Catholic potential anti-Qing power breaking social orders seriously. Qiying recognized Catholic under the Qing Dynasty’s basic perception. Although Qiying agreed on legalization of Catholic as a member of outside negotiation fraction, he has similar perception of Catholic to the prohibition period of Catholic. The only thing he wanted was to have westerners stay within the five ports anyway, and to control the people’s Christianity by regarding them as illegal believers. Although Catholic of Chinese people was allowed according to Emperor Dao-guang’s order, perception of the Qing Dynasty for Catholic was nearly the same as the prohibition period. Further, restricted policies of Christianity had been implemented according to this perception until the Tianjin-Beijing Treaty. France that had been a traditional Catholic protector for a long time began establishing its tradition as a Chinese Catholic protector by dispatching missionary workers of Society of Jesus to China in the Louis XⅣ period. France’s protection of Chinese Catholic was its tradition and duty, and it has intention to get political authority and fame in China. Under this political heritage, Lagrené tried to become a protector of Chinese Catholic for himself without instructions of the government. Lagrené who focused on his sense of duty as a protector of Chinese Catholic without understanding of Chinese traditional Confucian society and the long-term prohibition period by the Qing Dynasty created a foundation for the French protectorate over Catholic missions in China in the 19th century which originated from the Louis XⅣ period. As a matter of fact, France’s missionary policy in the 19th century focused on political authority and a duty as a Catholic protector on the foundation made by him irrespective of the monarchical period or the republican period in France. Therefore it is possible to say that anti-Christian movement against it shook China in the 19th century.

참고문헌 (47)

  1. Louis Wei Tsing-Sing, "La Politique Missionaire de la France en Chine 1842-1856: L’ouverture des cing ports chinois au commerce étranger et la liberté religieuse", Nouvelles Editions Latines (1960)
  2. 衛靑心, "法國對華傳敎政策 (上․下)" (1991), 中國社會科學出版社
  3. 金重遠, "拉萼尼使團和中法黃埔條約", 世界歷史, pp.1~ (1981)
  4. 張建華, "中法<黃埔條約>交涉: 以拉萼尼與耆英之間的來往照會函件爲中心", 歷史硏究, pp.2~ (2001)
  5. 郭衛東, "淸朝禁敎政策演變的若干問題", 安徽史學 (2001)
  6. 茅海建, "天朝的崩潰 - 鴉片戰爭再硏究" (1995), 三聯書店
  7. J. M. Callery, "Correspondance Diplomatique Chinoise: Relative aux Négociations du Traité de Whampoa Conclu entre la France et la Chine le 24 Octobre 1844", Tiré a Cent Bxemplairks
  8. 矢野仁一, "支那に於ける天主敎の保護權に就て", 史林 (1916)
  9. 張天護, "法國之護敎政策", 外交月報
  10. 李師洲, "帝國主義列强在華保敎權的沿革", 山東大學學報, 2 (1990)
  11. 顧衛民, "近代中國的保敎權問題, In 義和團運動100周年國際學術討論會論文集 下" (2002), 山東大學出版社
  12. 羅光, "敎廷與中國使節史" (1984), 傳記文學出版社
  13. 顧衛民, "中國與羅馬敎廷關係史略" (2000), 東方出版社
  14. 顧衛民, "中國天主敎編年史" (2003), 上海書店出版社
  15. 崔炳旭, "淸朝․敎皇廳의 外交關係 樹立 교섭(1885-1886)과 프랑스 ‘保敎權’ 문제", 東洋史學硏究, 100 (2007)
  16. 李少軍, "試論耆英的投降外交", 武漢大學學報, 3 (1990)
  17. 李光和, "示以誠信, 一視同仁” - 鴉片戰爭時期耆英對外交涉思想探析", 貴州社會科學, pp.4~ (2005)
  18. 李光和, "務存大體 量爲變通 - 鴉片戰爭時期耆英對外交涉思想探析之一", 懷化學院學報 (2007)
  19. 李光和, "力爭國權, 整軍經武” - 鴉片戰爭時期耆英對外交涉思想探析之二", 社科縱橫 (2007)
  20. 王開璽, "略論第一次鴉片戰爭期間耆英的制夷思想與實踐", 社會科學輯刊 (2008)
  21. 王中茂, "重評耆英的外交活動及其思想", 史學月刊 (2006)
  22. 崔韶子, "東西文化交流史 - 明淸時代 西學受容" (1987), 三英社
  23. 林金水, "試論南懷仁對康熙天主敎政策的影響", 世界宗敎硏究, 2 (1991)
  24. 林延淸, "論鴉片戰爭前淸政府對耶穌會士的政策", 南開史學 (1986)
  25. 吳伯婭, "康雍乾三帝與西學東漸" (2002), 宗敎文化出版社
  26. 李晟文, "明淸時期法國耶穌會士來華初探", 世界宗敎硏究, pp.56~ (1999)
  27. 費賴之, "在華耶穌會士列傳及書目 (上)", pp.429~ (1995), 中華書局
  28. "耶穌會傳敎士洪若翰神父致國王忏悔師, 本會可敬的拉雪玆神父的信", ~
  29. 杜赫德, "耶穌會士中國書簡集: 中國記憶錄 Ⅰ", pp.287~294 (2001), 大象出版社
  30. 榮振華, "在華耶穌會士列傳及書目補編 (下)", pp.785~ (1995), 中華書局
  31. 李明, "中國近事報道(1687-1692)󰡕", pp.119~120 (2004), 大象出版社
  32. 李晟文, "淸代法國耶穌會士在華傳敎策略", 淸史硏究, pp.49~52 (1995)
  33. 史式徽, "江南傳敎史 (1)", pp.63~65 (1983), 上海譯文出版社
  34. 中國第1歷史檔案館, "兩廣總督耆英奏報從前法人在粵情形及法國已經遣使來粤片」(道光 24年 5月 24日, In 鴉片戰爭檔案史料 第7冊", pp.470~471 (1992), 天津古籍出版社
  35. "兩廣總督耆英奏報赴澳門會見法使拉萼尼日期摺」(道光 24年 8月 14日), In 鴉片戰爭檔案史料 (7)", pp.501~502
  36. "兩廣總督耆英奏報在澳門連日會見法使大槪情形摺」(道光 24年 8月 29日)", 鴉片戰爭檔案史料, (7), pp.508~509
  37. 中國第一歷史檔案館, "兩廣總督耆英奏請將習敎之人稍寬禁令以示羈縻摺」(道光 24年 9月 11日, In 淸末敎案 第1冊", pp.3~ (1996), 中華書局
  38. 黃恩彤, "撫遠紀略, In 鴉片戰爭 第5冊", pp.430~431 (2000), 上海人民出版社․上海書店出版社
  39. 黃恩彤, "撫遠紀略", 鴉片戰爭, 5, pp.432~
  40. "Correspondance Diplomatique Chinoise, No.15", ~
  41. "Louis Wei (上)", pp.373~374 (1991)
  42. "Correspondance Diplomatique Chinoise, No.16", ~
  43. 王鐵崖, "中外舊約章彙編 第1冊", pp.62~ (1957), 三聯書店
  44. "王中茂", 54~ (2006)
  45. "The Chinese Repository", printed for The Proprietors, 13, pp.595~
  46. "兩廣總督耆英奏請將習敎之人稍寬禁令以示羈縻摺」(道光 24年 9月 11日)", 淸末敎案, 1, pp.2~4
  47. "著兩廣總督耆英再就弛禁天主敎一節向法使婉轉開導等事上諭」(道光 24年 10月 2日", 淸末敎案, ((1), pp.6~7

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (13건)