JapSin I, (38/42) 41/2b
Bianji houzhi 辯祭後誌.
By Paul Yan 嚴保琭 (Yan Mo 嚴謨).
Manuscript, three folios, written during the autumn of 1695 (乙亥秋月).

Below the title (at the top of the first column on the first folio) there is the following note (in smaller characters): “Previously there was a volume Bian bo ji 辨駁祭 written by Master Wan (i.e., Francisco Varo) and a volume Fen bian ji 分辨祭 written by myself. Now that Michael in his turn has clarified master Wan’s ideas, I in my turn will select a number of sections [from Michael’s essay] and explain them.” 前萬師有辨駁祭一冊予有分辨祭一冊今默覺再伸萬師之意予復擇數條明之.

Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, p. 65.

JapSin I, (38/42) 40/6a
Bianji 辨祭.
By Yan Mo 嚴謨.
Manuscript, folios 1–11. Chinese bamboo paper, one volume. 24 x 14 cm.

The cover bears the title Sidian 祀典 (cf. 40/7a) and a Portuguese inscription: “Refutação do Trattado do P’ien Çi do R.P.Fr. Franc^o Varo. 3^o M.S. Sinico.”

He does not base his argument on the original meaning of the word sacrifice, nor has he made a study of the Zhuwen 祝文 (the forms of invocation) written throughout the centuries. He has only picked out one or two ambiguous phrases from the Classics knowing nothing of the original meaning and not trying to arrive at an intelligent understanding of its context, but simply weaving together what he finds into a plot. For him the thing seems to be too easy!

JapSin I, (38/42) 41/1c
Bianji 辨祭.

An inscription on the margin reads: Pien-çi.

P.S. The Kaoyi 考疑 (Jap-Sin I, [38/42] 40/6b) in one volume was written after the writing of Master Wan (萬老師 i.e., Francisco Varo, O.P.), who had taken more than ten quotations from the Liji and Shijing to prove that the veneration of ancestors implies personal participation of the dead in the banquet and supplication for happiness on the part of the living. I have studied the original [and found that] there is nothing there pertaining to supplication for happiness nor is there any real presence or participation of the dead. Unfortunately my original draft is no longer to be found and for this reason I am unable to make you a copy. However, this book is with [Master] Luo (i.e., 羅肋山 Ciceri) and Li (i.e., 李西滿 Simão Rodrigues), who are now in Beijing. If you think it is acceptable, kindly let me know at your convenience. You can have a copy made from them and if you succeed in doing so, I should be very grateful for receiving a copy myself.

Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, pp. 63-64.

JapSin I, (38/42) 41/4
Cao gao 草稿 (chaobai 抄白).
By Yan Mo 嚴謨.
Manuscript, five unnumbered folios and cover page. Chinese bamboo paper, one volume. 24.3 x 14.3 cm.

The cover bears the title: Cao gao with chaobai (copied from correspondence) written in small characters. An inscription (three lines) reads: 此本煩為寄上李老師 (Please present this to Li laoshi). The Latin inscription reads: “Scriptus Ien Pauli.”

Folio 4 contains a letter from Yan Mo to Simão Rodrigues in which he informs him that the Christians of Zhangzhou have been without sacraments for a year owing to the prohibition of the Chinese Rites. “Because of this we feel that we are in hot water or in fire!” He greatly hopes that the Jesuits in Beijing will do something to check the influence of the two religious orders. At the end he says that the Li shi tiaowen has been more fully developed at the request of Monteiro.
From the above letter we know the family name of Yan Mo’s brother-in-law was Cai 蔡, though this was not mentioned in the letter to Monteiro. Now, in the Cao gao 草稿 ([38/42] 41/2a) there are three Christians mentioned with the family name Cai, namely Petrus, Theophilus and Ludovicus. Probably one of these is the brother-in-law of Yan Mo, mentioned in the letter to Rodrigues.

On folio 5, in a discussion of the honor given to Confucius there is a statement that reads: “This reply, collected to satisfy the inquiry of Li laoshi, has been revised.” Seemingly the discussion was directed against the treatise Bianji by Francisco Varo, O.P. (cf. Jap-Sin I, [38/42] 40/5). For Yan Mo it was hard to understand why anyone should object to giving Confucius the title of shengren 聖人 on the grounds that this was the title given only to saints of the Catholic Church. Yan Mo would retort that the title shengren had been given to Confucius long before the missioners came to China. It had merely been borrowed from the Chinese as the title for a saint of the Catholic Church. According to him, therefore, calling Confucius shengren had nothing to do with religion, since the meaning of this title differed so greatly from that of saints as used in the Catholic sense.

Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, pp. 66-67.

JapSin I, (38/42) 41/2a
Caogao 草稿.
By Yan Mo 嚴謨and five other Christians from Zhangzhou 漳州 (Fujian).
Handwritten copy, one folio and one and one-half line (Arabic numbers: 1–2). Chinese bamboo paper. 22.9 x 14.4 cm.

The cover bears the title in Chinese and a Latin inscription: “Scriptum Yen Pauli.”

From this letter we know that on Easter Sunday when the faithful gathered together at the church, Ma laoshi 馬老師 (i.e., Ma Xi’nuo 馬西諾, Magino Ventallol O.P., 1647–1732) made the announcement that Charles Maigrot, the bishop in Fujian, had persisted in forbidding the Chinese Rites and had refused the sacraments to Christians who would not yield to his mandate. The letter that Yan Mo wrote to Maigrot was considered an offence to the bishop. Michael, a nephew of Yan Mo, who was ill and was eager to go to confession, was refused the sacraments until he had promised to write against the writing of Yan Mo, which Michael had helped to copy. Yan Mo then goes on to say that he had been able to read some of Michael’s clarifications on the Bianji of Francisco Varo, altogether over twenty paragraphs. He then writes in his own defense “lest people may think that there is disagreement between uncle and nephew and thus lessen my authority.” He laments the absence of the Jesuits and is afraid that in case of illness there will be no priests who will give sacraments to the sick. He eagerly hopes for the return of Monteiro.

Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, pp. 64-65.

JapSin I, (38/42) 41/1a
Jizu kao 祭祖考.

Folio 1r gives the title in Chinese below: 閩漳聖教後學嚴謨保琭定猷氏輯 (Compiled by Paul Yan Mo, zi Dingyou, a disciple of the Catholic religion and a native of Zhangzhou in Fujian).

Folios 8–11 (Suji zhi xie 俗祭之邪) contain Yan Mo’s own remarks. He contends that the old sacrificial rites do nothing but express one’s veneration for one’s deceased parents and have nothing to do with demons. They contain nothing against the Catholic faith. Hence, if these were forbidden to Christians, it might arouse criticism among the pagans who would say that Christians are not human beings, since they act so strangely. The Church might in consequence close her door to pagans. Yan Mo stresses strongly the distinction between ancient Chinese rites and rites adulterated by pagan practices, which must be regarded as superstitious (this passage appears also in Lishi tiaowen: Jap-Sin I, [38/42] 40/2, pp. 17–23).

Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, pp. 62-63.

JapSin I, (38/42) 41/1a, 1b, 1c
Jizu kao 祭祖考.
Muzhu kao 木主考.
Bianji 辨祭.
By Yan Mo 嚴謨.
Three treatises, Chinese bamboo paper, bound in one volume. Twenty folios with one cover folio and one folio with a table of contents. 23.4 x 14.2 cm.

In the middle of each folio the heading is given on the upper part. The number of the folio is given below. The table of contents contains eight headings:

[41/1a]
1. Ji zhi yuanyi 祭之原意 (The original meaning of sacrifice) (ff. 1–3).
2. Sandai jiyi 三代祭儀 (The sacrificial ceremonies of the Three Dynasties) (f. 4).
3. Songru jiali 宋儒家禮 (The Jiali of the Song scholars) (ff. 5–6).
4. Houdai zhuwen 後代祝文 (Forms of invocation throughout the centuries) (f. 7).
5. Suji zhi xie 俗祭之邪 (The falsity of the vulgar sacrifices) (ff. 8–11).

[41/1b]
6. Muzhu kao 木主考 (Study on the tablets of deceased persons) (ff. 12–14).
7. Muzhu zonglun 木主總論 (Summary on the tablets of deceased persons) (f. 15).

[41/1c]
8. Bianji 辨祭 (Distinctions on “sacrifice”) (ff. 16–20).

Although the table of contents gives no. 5, the heading in the middle of the folios fails to give it. Below the heading 辨祭 in the table of contents (no. 8) there is a note: 此篇是因福安所作辯祭之文翻駁中祭禮故作辨祭以分別之 “In Fu’an [Fujian] someone has published the treatise Bianji (i.e., Francisco Varo, O.P.) criticizing the Chinese rites. We now write the Bianji in refutation of the above mentioned treatise.”
For the biography of Yan Mo, cf. Jap-Sin I, (38/42) 40/2.

Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, pp. 61-62.

JapSin I, (38/42) 40/6b
Kaoyi 考疑.
By Yan Mo 嚴謨.
Manuscript, folios 15–29. One volume, Chinese bamboo paper.

On folio 13 there are two lines in Latin: “Declaratio textuum, quae opponuntur sententiae cultus politici defunctorum etc.”

According to the paragraphs cited, the author has been overshadowed by doubts and suspects that the veneration of ancestors is connected with prayer for prosperity, and that the deceased ancestors will participate in the foods offered to them. Accordingly, we now wish to make an investigation.

This book has been presented to the Masters Luo 羅 and Ou 歐. They have accepted it and copies of the same have been sent to Fathers Wan 萬 and Xia 夏. Now I am presenting to you the original copy and hope that you will make good use of it.
Paul Yan Mo of Zhangzhou in Fujian.

The cover gives the Chinese title: Tiaowen jida 條問集答, fu muzhu kao yitiao 附木主考一條, Fujian Yan Baolu ji 福建嚴保綠集.” The Latin inscription reads: “Tiao-uen cie ta l^o MS sinico de ritibus & ceremoniis sinicis. Responsiones Ien Ambrosii & Ien Pauli Patris et filii ad quaesita P^is Li su.”

Li shi or Master Li (mentioned in the title), for whom Yan Mo wrote the replies, was Simão Rodrigues (1645-1704). He was known by his Chinese name as Li Ximan 李西滿 (zi 受謙). He was in Fujian around the year 1682. Later he went to Jiangnan and died in Suzhou (cf. Jap-Sin I, [38/42] 40/5). Cf. Pfister, no. 144; Répertoire, no. 719.
This book is a collection of replies on the meaning of different problems in connection with the Chinese rites. The first three pages give a list of reference books, personal names and dynastic periods. The general remarks, which consists of only one line, gives a number of conventional signs which are used throughout the book.
The replies are given in order and clearly. Besides quoting from diverse sources, the author gives his own ideas. He makes clear distinctions between the original meaning of ancestor worship and Buddhist superstitious practices. He then points out that, although the Song scholars theoretically denied the subsistence of the human soul, yet they were quite serious on the importance of funeral and burial rites. For Yan Mo, ancestor worship was an ancient practice in China by which one expressed filial piety towards one’s ancestors. Hence the missioners need not forbid it and thus incur disapproval from the pagans.
With regard to the veneration of Confucius, Yan tries to show that Confucius was respected by the Chinese for his excellence as a teacher. In the ceremonies one did not pray to him for favors of any kind.
Finally in his study on the origin of the ancestral tablets (pp. 93–100: Muzhu kao 木主考, see also Jap-Sin I, [38/42] 41/1b), Yan Mo comes to the conclusion that the Chinese did not believe that the souls of their ancestors were actually present in the tablets. Rather, by looking at these tablets they were reminded of their beloved forefathers. Again there is no superstition involved.

Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, pp. 45-46.

JapSin I, (38/42) 41/1b
Muzhu kao 木主考.

An inscription on the upper margin reads: Mo chu cao.

Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, p. 63.

The fascinating God : a challenge to modern Chinese theology presented by a text on the name of God written by a 17th century Chinese student of theology / Nicolas Standaert.
Originally presented as the author's thesis--Fujen Catholic University.
Includes bibliographical references (p. 147-[154])

Introduction: 17th century Chinese students of theology--I. Yan Mo and the Ditiankao: Yan Mo's life, writings--Ditiankao: versions, title, date, arrangement of the text--difference between versions A and B--Translation: list of quotations--personal discussion--Analysis: Idea of God in Personal Discussion--Sources: hermeneutical argument--Attributes of God: proofs in Chinese Classics--God and the human being: historical argument--Without beginning, Trinity, Creation: textual approach--Heaven and Master of Heaven: literary approach--Difference between Yan Mo and the Song commentaries. II: On the idea of the Dieties "Heaven" or "Lord" in the Book of Documents, the Book of Odes, The Analects and the Mencius--Methodology: Question of the texts--Heaven and the human being--Book of Documents--Book of Odes--Analects--Mencius--Classics and the Ditiankao--Bibliography.

"In connection with the Rites Controversy towards the end of the seventeenth century, several Chinese literati wrote important essays explaining the issues from a Chinese perspective .... Yan Mo (baptised as Paul, suigong 1709) wrote ... Di Tian kao 帝天考 (Investigation of Lord and Heaven), a discussion of the usage of Tianzhu 天主 (Lord of Heaven) with the terms Tian and Shangdi as found in the Classics such as Shujing and Shijing, as well as the works of Confucius and Mencius..." Cf. Standaert, Handbook of Christianity in China, v.1, p.434.

"In connection with the Rites Controversy towards the end of the seventeenth century, several Chinese literati wrote important essays explaining the issues from a Chinese perspective .... Yan Mo (baptised as Paul, suigong 1709) wrote ... Di Tian kao 帝天考 (Investigation of Lord and Heaven), a discussion of the usage of Tianzhu 天主(Lord of Heaven) with the terms Tian 天and Shangdi 上帝 as found in the classics such as the Shujing 書經 and Shijing 詩經, as well as the works of Confucius and Mencius.-- Cf. Standaert, Handbook of Christianity in China, vol. 1, p. 434.

本書據梵蒂岡敎廷圖書館藏手抄本編輯整理.
Cover illustration: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana. Rac. Gen. Or. III-248 (10)
明末淸初耶穌会思想文献汇编 = An expository collection of the Christian philosophical works between the end of the Ming dynasty and the beginning of the Qing dynasty in China ; 第38册.

Local access dig.pdf. in folder: [Andrew Chung Series].

"In connection with the Rites Controversy towards the end of the seventeenth century, several Chinese literati wrote important essays explaining the issues from a Chinese perspective .... Yan Mo (baptised as Paul, suigong 1709) wrote ... Di Tian kao 帝天考 (Investigation of Lord and Heaven), a discussion of the usage of Tianzhu 天主(Lord of Heaven) with the terms Tian 天 and Shangdi 上帝 as found in the classics such as the Shujing 書經 and Shijing 詩經, as well as the works of Confucius and Mencius.-- Cf. Standaert, Handbook of Christianity in China, vol. 1, p. 434.

Full bio-bibliographical note: Ad Dudink & Nicolas Standaert, Chinese Christian Texts Database (CCT-Database).

JapSin I, (38/42) 41/3
Zhi Mu laoshi wen liangshou 致穆老師文兩首, fu ba yishou 附跋一首.
By Yan Mo 嚴謨.
Manuscript, six folios (Arabic numbers). Chinese bamboo paper, one volume. 24.3 x 14.3 cm.

An inscription on the top margin of the first folio reads: “Scriptus Ien Pauli.”

Herewith I present two essays and a postscript to Mu laoshi (i.e., José Monteiro) for his study, and I request that all the works, as found in the list of my writings, be copied and sent to Nie laoshi 聶老師 (Father Greslon) of Jiangxi province. I have been told that Father Greslon intends to write on this subject. He asked earlier for my writings, but because of the long distance I have never carried out his wishes.

1. On the temple of Confucius in Gucheng Xian 榖城縣, Xiangzhou 襄州 (Hubei), by Ouyang Xiu 歐陽修 (1007–1072).
2. An eight-legged essay (bagu wen 八股文) on the veneration of ancestors by Tang Laihe 湯來賀 (jinshi of 1640). This essay contains remarks by diverse scholars.

Yan Mo’s postscript seeks to prove that neither in the veneration of Confucius nor in that of the ancestors there is any superstition, nor is there anything that might show usurpation of God’s right as was suspected by some of the foreign missioners, who at the same time thought that what Chinese Christians told them was not reliable. Yan Mo therefore selected these two essays from pagan writers to satisfy his accusers.

Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, pp. 65-66.