JapSin I, (38/42) 39/1
Ganzhou tang Xia xianggong shengming Madiya hui Fang laoye shu 贛州堂夏相公聖名瑪第亞回方老爺書.
By Mathias Xia 夏瑪第亞.
Manuscript, one volume. Chinese bamboo paper. Three folios. 24 x 13 cm.

The covers bears the title and a Latin inscription: “de aedibus | quae | erigitur viris in | memoriam | auctore Hia Mathia | de Kancheu in | Kiamsi.”

Since the note in Portuguese says that Xia lived at the church of Can cheu (Ganzhou 贛州), it seems quite certain that this old scholar was a catechist. Fang laoye, to whom this letter is addressed, is Francesco Saverio Filippucci (1632–1692), whose Chinese name was Fang Jige 濟各 (zi 以智). Twice he had been Provincial of Japan: from December 1680 to December 1683, and from 1690 to 6 January 1692; he has also been Visitor of China and Japan (1688–1691).
The letter is a reply to Filippucci’s request for the history of the shengci 生祠 (shrines in honour of a living person). Xia excuses himself for not being able to say very much because he has lost all his books in the civil war. All he could do, was to do his best to write what he knows about the subject. He mentions the shrine built in honor of the notorious Ming eunuch Wei Zhongxian 魏忠賢 (fl. 1624) and he quotes as his authority the Mingchao tongji 明朝通紀.

In the later part of his letter Xia severely criticizes Buddhism and Daoism. He praises Ricci highly as the only hero who dared to challenge the Buddhists. He eagerly requests Filippucci to write a book in refutation of Buddhism or, failing this, to write to Verbiest in Beijing and let the latter prepare a memorial to the throne to expose the iniquities of the Buddhists with the hope that Buddhism will be abolished in China.
There is no date in this letter, but from the Shengci yuanyou ce 生祠緣由冊 (Jap-Sin I, 39/2), at the end of which Xia gives the date of Kangxi 25 (1686), we can safely say that this letter must have been written shortly before 1686.

Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, pp. 39-40.

JapSin I, (38/42) 39/4
Jili paozhi 祭禮泡製.
By Mathias Xia 夏瑪第亞.
Manuscript, Twelve folios. One volume. Chinese bamboo paper. 24 x 14 cm.

The cover bears the title and a Latin inscription: “De ritibus Çi, ex libro Li Ki, Auctore Hia Siam Cum seu Hia Mathia.”

From this passage it is clear that the Chinese rites conform to natural law and agree with the law of the supernatural. The first three of the Ten Commandments teach us to be at peace with Him and the remaining seven teach us to be at peace with our neighbour. This begins with filial piety, to honor one’s parents. The ancient emperors of China, being enlightened by God, taught their subjects to be at peace with their neighbor and they insisted that, to begin with, they should be at peace with their parents . . . (f. 5b–6a).

Those who honor their parents should not be blamed as usurpers of God’s right. What the natural law regards as right often agrees with the supernatural. Supernatural law tells us to love God; natural law tells us to love our parents. The supernatural law tells us to honor God, the natural law tells us to honor our parents . . . (f. 6b).

. . . Jesus foresaw that the Jews would accuse him as a violator of their religion. He therefore observed the law of Moses. He foresaw the accusation of forbidding others to pay tax to Caesar, he made the declaration that what belongs to Caesar should be rendered to Caesar. . . . If we wish to avoid false accusations we should understand the Chinese traditions from the view point of natural law. And, to be able to do this we must read Chinese books widely, since in them we can find out the natural law. We can never find out the natural law among the Chinese unless we study Chinese writings, and we cannot preach the supernatural in China, unless we understand thoroughly what the Chinese hold on the natural law. If we wish to preach to Chinese scholars by quoting copiously from the ancient writings of China as a proof of what we preach, we must be able to tell the sources of our quotations. The Chinese scholars then will be convinced and will show confidence in us. On the contrary, if we fail to quote Chinese writings in full detail in order to convince them, then, no matter what we say, they will not be convinced. Even if we try to tell them about supernatural mysteries they will not be ready to accept. Perhaps externally, they will pretend to agree, but in our absence they will do the opposite. [Hence, we repeat] we must study Chinese writings widely, if we wish to open the minds of the Chinese (f. 8a–9a).

If we wish to judge Chinese things clearly, we must go through Chinese writings carefully, just as a magistrate who is hearing a law suit must read carefully the writings of the accuser and the accused. It would be impossible [for him] to decide who was right and who was wrong unless he has gone through the papers of both sides. In the same manner, we cannot decide the right and wrong of Chinese things without going through Chinese writings.
The Chinese writings are the papers of accusation. An upright magistrate when he decides a criminal case makes sure that the innocent comes out free. How much more does this apply to a preacher of God’s holy religion. How can he arraign the innocent with false accusations? We must not try to excuse ourselves by saying that it is not necessary to study the Chinese writings, as they are of no importance. The Pharisees neglected the study of the ancient scriptures. As a result, they failed to grasp the mystery of the Incarnation. The three kings, on the other hand, living in the country of Bo’erxiya 百爾西亞 (Persia) studied books other than the Jewish religion and nevertheless they came to know that Our Lord Jesus had been born. God had enlightened the minds of pagans in pagan regions. These people had prophesied [the apparition] of the new star and this account was recorded in their ancient writings. God is everywhere. Who can tell for certain that there are no accounts of supernatural mysteries in the ancient Chinese writings? How can we explain the passage in the Zhouli 周禮 in which the victory over the devil by the [Holy] Cross is prophesied? (f. 10a–b).

JapSin I, (38/42) 39/5
Liji jizhi cuoyan 禮記祭制撮言.
By Mathias Hsia 夏瑪第亞.
Manuscript, four folios. One volume. Chinese bamboo paper. 24 x 14 cm.

The cover bears the title and a Portuguese inscription: “Libros notas nos mandou o Hia Siam Cum de Cancheu em isto de 1688 elhe as tirou do Ly Ki.”

When we come to examine the whole book of the Liji, the word xiang 饗 (to offer) is used in the ceremonies of the dead as well as in the ceremonies of guests. From this we conclude that in China the ceremonies of the dead were nothing else than this: that one venerates the dead as if they were still alive. The xiangli 饗禮 are ceremonies of guests and they are just as solemn as the ceremonies for the dead. It is divided into half or full sets of ritual utensils zu 俎 used in the offering ceremonies and all things necessary, such as the bian 籩 (basket used to contain fruits), the dou 豆 (container used for holding food in ceremonies) and the fu 脯 (dried and minced meats), can be found there. Unfortunately, the messenger is in a hurry and I have copied out only what I could and hope to send the whole manuscript to you later.

JapSin I, (38/42) 40/10a
[Liyi dawen 禮儀答問].
By Xia Madiya (Mathias) 夏瑪第亞.
Manuscript, folios 171–194. Chinese bamboo paper, one volume. 24 x 14 cm.

On the margin of folio 171 there is a Portuguese inscription: “Este tratado he de Hia Siam cum p. St^o nome Mathias, Bacharel de Kien cheu que mora na Igr^a de Can cheu e o deo à o P. Gabiani V. Pro. ¹” (cf. Jap-Sin I, 39/1).

If we wish to discuss things Chinese we must have sufficient Chinese books, otherwise we do not dare to make statements which may be uncertain, lest the pagans think that what we say is not true and we may lead them to think that our Christian teachings are false. In China, whatever we try to do must have an explanation. If we wish to discuss something we must go to the essential points before we can handle it. Hence it is not difficult to speak about something but it is difficult to be well informed. It is not difficult to be well informed, but it is difficult to possess all the necessary books.

1. Fengzhou tongjian 鳳洲通鑑 by Wang Shizhen 王世貞 (1526–1590).
2. Shiwu yuanshi 事物原始 (probably the author meant the Shiwu jiyuan 事物紀原 by Gao Cheng 高承 of the Song dynasty).
3. Soushen ji 搜神記 by Gan Bao 干寶 of the Jin 晉 dynasty.

He excuses himself for not being able to answer the questions fully because the above mentioned books were not available in Ganzhou. He vehemently denies that in the veneration of ancestors the idea of supplication for their protection and blessings was involved. At the same time he tries to show the misunderstanding of some of the adversaries who give quotations of the Classics without knowing the exact meaning of the context.

Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, pp. 60-61.

Full citation, see: Ad Dudink & Nicolas Standaert, Chinese Christian Texts Database (CCT-Database)

Refutation of Piwang pi lüeshuo 闢妄闢略說, of which Xia gives eight quotations (fols. 1a, 2a-b, 3a-b, 4a, 5a-b, 6a, 7b, 8a), followed by comments.

JapSin I, 156
Paozhi piwang pi 泡制闢妄闢.
By Xia xianggong 夏相公 (Mathias Xia).
Manuscript, one juan (eight folios). Chinese bamboo paper in one volume. 24.7 x 14.2 cm.

The cover bears a label in ink and below it is written: 贛州堂夏相公 (Xia, xianggong of the Ganzhou mission). The Latin inscription reads: “Pao Chi Pi uam pi | Apologia contra Apologias in Pi uam.” There is an inscription in Francesco Filippucci’s own handwriting: “O Hia S.C. o fez e nos mandou no 1687” (Xia, xianggong made it and sent it to us in 1687).

For Mathias Hsia, see Jap-Sin I, 39.1–5, 40.10a, etc.
Source: Albert Chan, S.J., Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, pp. 207-208.

JapSin I, (38/42) 39/3
Shengci gushi 生祠故事.
Compiled by Mathias Xia 夏瑪第亞.
Manuscript, five folios. One volume. 24 x 14 cm.

The cover has only the inscription: “贛州夏相公 (Xia xianggong of Ganzhou).”

Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, p. 41.

JapSin I, (38/42) 39/2
Shengci yuanyou ce 生祠緣由冊.
By Mathias Xia 夏瑪第亞.
Manuscript, eleven folios. One volume. Chinese bamboo paper. 24 x 14 cm.

Mathias Xia wrote this treatise on the origin of the shrine in honor of a living person at the request of Francesco Saverio Filippucci (cf. 39/1).
The opening paragraph describes the origin of the shengci: when a government official had performed exceptional acts of benefit to the public, the people in order to show their gratitude erected a building in which they set up a tablet with the name and age of the official and on the first and fifteenth day of the month they would come together and pay him honor with incense and candles. In some cases they would even make a statue of the official. After his death the building was changed into a xianxianci 先賢祠 (memorial hall). New commemorative ceremonies would then begin. According to Xia, these were only ceremonies for the dead; they were by no means sacrifices to a deity. Xia then goes on to explain the nature of the shengci and cites different cases from the history of China.
At the end of the treatise there is an inscription which says: “This final copy is being made on the night of the twenty-ninth day of the tenth month in the twenty-fifth year of the Kangxi reign (14 December 1686) and I will send it to your reverence as was requested."

Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, pp. 40-41.