Bound with: Informatio antiquissima de praxi missionariorum Sinensium Societatis Jesu : circa ritus Sinenses, data in China, jam ab annis 1636. & 1640. à Francisco Furtado antiquo-Missionario, & Vice-Provinciali Sinensi ejusdem Societatis. Paris, 1700.
52, [10] p. ; 18 cm. (1st work) ; [40] 94 p. ; 18 cm. (2nd work)

JapSin I, (38/42) 40/5
Bianji canping 辯祭參評.
Communicated orally by Li Ximan (Simão Rodrigues, 1645–1707) 李西滿授 and written down by Li Liangjue 李良爵述.
Manuscript, sixty-nine folios (eleven chapters). One volume, Chinese bamboo paper. There are remarks in blue ink on the top margins of the folios and in the manuscript itself.

The cover gives the title 辨祭參評. Below the title we find the inscription: “Communicated orally by the Franciscan Li Andang” (Antonio S. M. Caballero). This inscription has been blotted out with ink. The Latin inscription reads: “Pien Çi, discursus de littera Çi [祭], auctore P. Antonio à S. Maria [“Antonio à S. Maria” is blotted out and replaced by “Varo”] cum annotationibus Li Kieu cum [‘Kieu cum’ is blotted out] seu Leantio petitis a P^a Li si muon. N.B. Li Leantius fuit Siam cum seu Amanuensis et domesticus ac cathechista Ill^mi D. Maygrot.”

This chapter is quite right. But we must take into consideration that the Catholic faith is not yet flourishing in China, while the veneration of ancestors and of Confucius have been practised for a long time. The people all know that this is Confucianism and therefore they should not disobey; furthermore, this veneration comes from an imperial order. It is necessary to find a way of reconciliation. Whether or not the practice is a transgression of God’s commandment, we have to leave to the judgement of learned theologians of the West. Let us hope for the best.

How are we going to preach the Gospel in China when we have already made ourselves enemies of Buddhism and Daoism and now we are beginning to be hostile to Confucianism. Beyond doubt we are looking for trouble!

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.

Reprint of the 1701 ed. published in Peking : "Limited to two hundred copies." Original printed from wood blocks on double leaves of rice paper.
Dated: Pekini, 29 Julij anni 1701. Signed: Antoine Thomas, Filippo Grimaldi, Thomay Pereyra, Joannes Francs Gerbillion, Josephus Suares, Joachimus Bouvet, Kilianus Stumpf, J. Baptista Regis, Ludovicus Pernon, Dominicus Parrenin.

"A very important work composed and sent by the Peking Jesuits in 1701 from China to Rome. The book contains and explains the Kangxi Emperor's declaration about the Chinese terms for God and the non-religious nature of the Chinese Rites venerating ancestors and Confucius. This view, which was also that of the Jesuits, is also supported by quotations from the Chinese Classics and from statements by leaned Chinese of the time."--note inserted "From the collections of the Institute for Chinese-Western Cultural History"

Full title: Brevis relatio eoru[m], quae spectant ad declarationem Sinaru[m] imperatoris Kam Hi circa caeli, Cumfucii et avoru[m] cultu[m], datam anno 1700. Accedunt primatu[m], doctissimoru[m]q[ue] viroru[m], et antiquissimae traditionis testimonia. Opera PP. Societ. Jesu Pekini pro Evangelii propagatione laborantium.

Original printed from wood blocks on double leaves of rice paper.
Dated: Pekini, 29 Julij anni 1701. Signed: Antoine Thomas, Filippo Grimaldi, Thomay Pereyra, Joannes Francs Gerbillion, Josephus Suares, Joachimus Bouvet, Kilianus Stumpf, J. Baptista Regis, Ludovicus Pernon, Dominicus Parrenin.

Reprint of the 1701 ed. published in Peking : "Limited to two hundred copies."
61 double leaves ; 23 cm ; bound and boxed in Chinese fashion.
Series: Classica Japonica: facsimile series in the Tenri Central Library : Section 11 : Varia III ; 4

"A very important work composed and sent by the Peking Jesuits in 1701 from China to Rome. The book contains and explains the Kangxi Emperor's declaration about the Chinese terms for God and the non-religious nature of the Chinese Rites venerating ancestors and Confucius. This view, which was also that of the Jesuits, is also supported by quotations from the Chinese Classics and from statements by leaned Chinese of the time."--note inserted in Ricci Institute edition.

Brevis Relatio eorum, | quae spectant ad Declaratio~ | nem Sinarum Imperatoris | Kam Hi | circa caeli, Cumfucii, et Avorum | cultum, datam anno 1700. | Accedunt Primatum, Doctissimo~ | rumque virorum, et antiquissimae tra~ | ditionis testmonia. | Opera PP. Societ. Jesu Pekini pro | Evangelii propagatione laborantium.

White Chinese bamboo paper in one volume, bound in Chinese style. Sixty-one + three folios. The number of the folio is given below the fish-tail in the middle of each folio. Arabic numbers are also given at the bottom of each folio.
Folios 1v–5v contain declarations and ff. 6v–10v text in Manchu (cf. Jap-Sin 157: Sinensis anno 1700, supplex libellus oblatus Imp^re | circa nonnullos Ritus sinenses | decretum Imp^ris de iisdem. | Simile decretum, et supplex libellus missi sunt ad Sum. Pontificem.). Folios 11v–14v contain an account in Latin of a memorial to the Kangxi emperor in Manchu and of the reply of the emperor sent to the provinces; folios 15–16 give the translation into Chinese. Folios 17–61 give the views of eminent ministers at the imperial court on the question of Tianzhu 天主, the veneration given to Confucius and ancestor worship. Toward the end Chinese Classics are cited to confirm the points discussed. Ten ministers are quoted in this document, namely:

1. The younger brother of the Kangxi Emperor, Changning 常寧 (1657–1703).
2. So san lao ye [Suo san laoye 索三老爺, i.e., Songgotu 索額圖 (hao 愚庵, d. 1703?). He was an uncle to the empress and had great influence at the court. In 1688 he was appointed head of a commission to negotiate with the Russians about the border conflicts in Manchuria. Both Jean-François Gerbillon and Tomé Pereira were on the staff and he became a good friend of the Jesuits. The document mentions him especially for the efforts he made to secure liberty for the preaching of the Gospel in China: “. . . qui anno praecedentis saeculi 92° missus est ab Imperatore ad Tribunal Rituum, ac deinde Colaorum, ut suâ eloquentia persuaderet dandam Libertatem Edicto Publico, Legi christianae, ad quam ille bene affectus strenue id praestitit, et efficaciter est consecutus” (f. 23v).
3. Mim lao-ye [Ming laoye 明老爺, i.e., Mingzhu 明珠 (zi 端範, 1635–1708). His grandfather, Gintaisi, was one of the rulers of the Yehe nation, which was conquered by the founder of the Qing dynasty. The family then served under the Manchu Plain Yellow Banner. They followed the Manchus to Beijing in 1644 and became nobles of the new dynasty. The document states that Mingzhu served as Grand Secretary (Primus Colaus) for fifteen years; in fact he was in this office only for twelve years (1677–1688). He, too, is said to have shown love to the Divine Law of the Christians (f. 25v).
4. Isanghâ [Yinsanga 尹桑阿] (1638–1703), Manchu of the Plain Yellow Banner. He was Grand Secretary from 1688 to 1701. The emperor had a high esteem for him as a talented minister.
5. Kong Yuqi 孔 毓圻 (zi 鍾在, 1657–1723). He was native of Qufu 曲阜 (Shandong) and a descendant of Confucius. He came to the capital in 1702 for the birthday greeting to the emperor, and was asked by the Jesuits for his opinion on the question of the Chinese Rites (f. 29v, 30r).
6. Vam Hi (Wang Xi 王熙, ziu 子雍, 胥庭; hao 慕齋, 1612–1701). He was a native of Wanping in Beijing. He held the office of Grand Secretary from 1682 to 1701. The document mentions him as: “viri toto Imperio, ob eruditionis, ac prudentiae famam celeberrimi” (f. 30r).
7. Cham Yim (Zhang Ying 張英, zi 敦復, hao 樂圃, 1638–1708). He was a native of Tongcheng (Anhui). In 1677 Chang, then an expositor at the Hanlin Academy, was selected by the emperor to serve in the newly created office known as Nan Shufang 南書坊 (Imperial Study). Only very talented members of the Hanlin Academy were selected for the Nan Shufang and the choice was often made by the emperor personally. He was Grand Secretary from 1699 to 1701.
8. Han Tan 韓菼 (zi 元少, hao 慕盧, 1637–1704). The document says that “insuper Praesidem agit supremi Tribunalis Rituum” (f. 31v); Han Tan was President of the Ministry of Rites from 1700 to 1704. Earlier, in 1703, he wrote a preface to the work Tianxue benyi 天學本義 attributed to Joachim Bouvet, which shows that he was a friend of the missioners (cf. ECCP 1:275).
9. Sun Zhimi 孫致彌 (zi 愷似, hao 松坪, 1642–1709). He was the grandson of Ignatius Sun Yuanhua 孫元化 (cf. Jap-Sin I, 62). Sun Zhimi, “a jinshi of 1678, attracted notice in 1678 because—though he was then only a student in the Imperial Academy—he was specially selected as one of the envoys sent on a mission to Korea to collect poetry there. He achieved some note also as a poet and a calligrapher” (ECCP 2:686).
10. Li Kai 李鎧. His name does not appear in any of the official books. We derive our information only from our document, which says that he was an old man, not distinguished by his official position but highly respected by both the Chinese and Manchus for his great erudition. For more than thirty years he was employed by the emperor in writing books now in Chinese, now in Manchu. He is said to have translated European books on science into the Chinese and Manchu languages. The Tianzhu shiyi by Ricci was translated by him (f. 32r). The same old man is said to have translated Aleni’s book Wanwu zhenyuan 萬物真原 from Chinese into Manchu (f. 33v).

A copy of seven of these ten testimonies can be found in Jap-Sin 160, no. 3, which consists of nine testimonies (cf. SF 8:751–752, n. 133). The first three Manchu dignitaries do not appear in that text and instead two Chinese take their place: Lin Wenying 林文英 of Fujian (閩中) and Wu Sheng 吳晟 of Huaiyin 淮陰 (Jiangsu). Lin Wenying we have met already as the author of a preface (1697) to a reprint of the Da ke wen 答客問 (see Jap-Sin I, 146). Wu Sheng (zi 麗正, hao 梅原) was a native of Quanjiao 全椒 (Anhui) and he lived from 1635 to 1694. See “Epitaph of Wu Sheng” in Chu Xin 儲欣 (fl. 1770), Zailu caotang wenji 在陸草堂文集, juan 6.

The statements of these ten scholars praised unanimously the Jesuits’ correct understanding of the Chinese Rites. They had all read the treatise, which most of them attributed to Min Xiansheng 閔先生 (i.e., Claudio Filippo Grimaldi), although others attributed it to the Jesuits as a group (西洋諸先生).
The document was signed by the following members of the Society of Jesus in Peking on 29 July 1701: Antoine Thomas, vice-provincial of China, Claudio Filippo Grimaldi, rector in Beijing, Tomé Pereira, Jean-François Gerbillon, José Soares, Joachim Bouvet, Kilian Stumpf, Jean-Baptiste Régis, Louis de Pernon, Dominique Parrenin.

Folio 30 (recto) has the following original handwritten statements (cf. Jap-Sin 160, no. 3):

Aliqua Testimonia Doctorum Imperii ac Magnatum Latine edita in relatione an. 1701, pag. 30 [b].
alia indicata pag. 22 eiusdem relationis. omnia numero novem.

Testor hoc exemplar esse legitimum Pekini 3 oct. 1702.
Antonius Thomas, Vice~Prov^lis Soc^tis Jesu, Vice~Prov^ae Sinensis (With a red seal of the Society of Jesus).

Ego Episcopus Macaensis testor | hanc esse veram Copiam ori | ginalis. Macai 20 Januarii | an. 1703. Jes. de Cazal Ep^us Ma | caonensis.

Ego Notarius Episcopalis Macaensis | fidem facio hunc supra testificationem | esse propriam Ill^mi Dⁿⁱ Joannis de Cazal Episcopi Macaensis — Messi | 20 Januarii an. 1703. B^ac Acunha. Recognita ut in fide separata, Joseph Zambecchinus, Dominicus do Blanchis.

1. Ego infrascriptus, Vice~Prov^lis Soc^tis Jesu Vice~Prov^ae Sinensis testor me accepisse testimonium fratris natu minoris Imperatoris Tartaro~Sinici supra relatum folio 21º in cuius fidem, manu propria subscribo: Pekini 30a Septembris 1701.
Antonius Thomas.

2. Nos infra scripti Sacerdotes Societatis Jesu testamur nos accepisse d^tta testimonia duorum magnatum So San Lao ye & Mim Lao ye, nec non Isangha Imperii primi ministri a folio 22º ad 28º supra relata. In quorum fidem subscribimus. Pekini die 30a Septembris 1701.

Joannes Franciscus Gerbillon.
Superior Patrum Gallorum.
Joachim Bouvet.

3. Ego infra subscriptus Soc^tis Jesu Collegii Pekinesis Rector testor me accepisse testmonia quatuor quae fol. 29, 30, 31 et 32 continent^r in quorum fidem hic subscribo, die 30 septembris 1702.

Philippus Grimaldi.

4. Ego infra scriptus Sacerdos Societatis Jesu, testor me accepisse duo inter decem ultima testimonia supra relata a folio 32º usque ad 33ⁱⁿ. In quorum fidem subscribo. Pekini die 30^a Septembris anni 1702.

Joachim Bouvet.

5. Ego infra subscriptus vice~Prov^lis Soc^tis Jesu Vice~Prov^ae Sinensis testor hoc exemplar Brevis Relationis etc., habens folia impressa 61 esse legitimum, uti et subscriptiones hic positas. In quorum fidem, Libellum in prima pagina et ultima, proprio officii Sigillo munivi, atque hic subscribo.

Pekini 26 Oct. 1701.
Antonius Thomas.
(with a red seal of the Society of Jesus).

Libellus quo PP. Societatis suam agendi rationem in Regno Sinarum defendunt, ac de ritum erga Confucium, Coelum, Terram ac parentes cultu rationes assignant, easque coeremonias mere Politicas, cogestis testimoniis sapientum sinarum, esse propug’t.
Hoc exemplar est originale a PP. Pekini Societatis suscriptum, rarissimum ideo, ac praetiosissimum esse nemini dubium est.

Jesuit Archives (ARSI) JapSin I, 206a
Brevis Relatio.

The cover bears a Latin inscription: “Exemplar testimoniorum impressum Pekini.”

Jesuit Archives (ARSI) JapSin I, 206b
Brevis Relatio.

The cover bears a Latin inscription: “Hic liber secundum originale Pekinense impressus fuit Cantone in Cina anno 1701.”

Jesuit Archives (ARSI) JapSin I, 206c
Brevis Relatio.

The cover bears a Latin inscription: “Revdo Patri Thyrso Gonzalez | Generali Preposito Soctis Jesu | Carolus Turcottus.”

Jesuit Archives (ARSI) JapSin I, 206d
Brevis Relatio.

Another copy of the Cantonese edition; sixty-one folios without a list of corrigenda.

Jesuit Archives (RSI) JapSin I, 206e
Brevis Relatio.

The same as Jap-Sin I, 206c.

Jesuit Archives (ARSI) JapSin I, 206f
Brevis Relatio.

The folios 15, 16 and 28–61 are missing.

Jesuit Archives (ARSI) JapSin I, 206g
Brevis Relatio.

This is a copy in handwriting on bamboo paper; it does not reproduce the Manchu text: the Chinese text after folio 23 is followed immediately by folio 31. The text, however, is complete, although the pagination might suggest that it is incomplete.

Keywords: Tianzhu ; Da Ming guidian ; Beijing, Nanjing ; Jiali ; Ancestral tablets. Chongmiao ; Zhutang ; ancestral temples ; Maillard de Tournon, Carlo Tommaso, 1668-1710 ; Maigrot, Charles, 1652-1730 ; Catholic Church. Congregatio Sancti Officii. Catholic Church. Pope (1700-1721 : Clement XI).

Breves Notationes in praecipua loca observationum residualium Societatis Jesu contra mandatum Reverend Dom. Caroli Maigrot Continuatio Historia cultus Sinensium.
Another copy Gleeson Library Stacks BV3413 .H58

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).

編撰者簡介..................................................................................... 6
封面圖案解說..................................................................................7
序 ----- 曾慶文神父.................................................................... 10
李亮神父.......................................................................12
古匡昌老師.................................................................... 18
陳欣雨博士................................................................... 22
謝明光博士................................................................... 26
王雪迎博士....................................................................30
前言............................................................................................. 34
梵蒂岡第二屆大公會議 --- 教會的新里程碑................................... 41
敬祖在宗教祭禮的位置..................................................................51
中西傳統文化與教會傳統文化........................................................81
孝 --- 中國傳統孝的教育與西方對孝的觀念.................................. 121
婚禮儀式與敬祖傳統....................................................................134
中國傳統民俗習慣....................................................................... 155
從墓園、墓地的設計和安排反映傳統文化的特色..........................176
天主教教會對火葬的訓令顯示禮儀、禮節的統一性..................... 200
「敬祖」在長達三百年的中國禮儀之爭的焦點............................224
死亡與離別的面面觀................................................................... 243
喪禮禮節的目的.......................................................................... 256
因翻譯和使用不適當詞彙而產生的誤會....................................... 322
迷信與忌諱在日常生活的影響......................................................359
魂與魄.........................................................................................377
共融--- 未來的挑戰......................................................................388
結語............................................................................................395
參考資料.................................................................................... 412
文中提及的部份人物簡介............................................................ 438
訪談及筆者觀察記錄................................................................... 459
前輩/ 同儕意見
--- 周永權.................................................................................... 461
--- 盧婉卿....................................................................................462
致謝........................................................................................... 463
收入分配....................................................................................466
版權頁........................................................................................ 468

Local access dig.pdf. [Tsang-Jingzu.pdf]

JapSin I, (38/42) 40/9a
Jisi wenda 祭祀問答.
By Hong Yinajue (Ignatius) 洪依納爵, Zhu Ximan (Simon) 朱西滿 and Yang Boduolu (Peter) 楊伯多綠.
Manuscript, folios 101–119. Chinese bamboo paper, one volume. 24.5 x 14.5 cm.

The cover bears a Portuguese inscription: “Sobre as controversias.” The first folio bears the title in Chinese. The upper margin bears a Latin inscription: “Tractatus datus P. Intorcettae a Christianis in Ham cheu de Che kiam sub titulo ci su uen ta.”

At the end of the manuscript there is a letter addressed to Bai laoshi 白老師 by the same authors. Among the Jesuit missioners of this time there were two who had Bai for their family name in Chinese, namely, Johann Grueber 白乃心 (1623–1680) and Joachim Bouvet 白晉 (1656–1730). Since neither of them had ever been missioners in Hangzhou, it is hardly possible that either of them was the person to whom the letter was addressed: “Since your Reverence left us several years ago we have often thought of your Reverence. When will your Reverence be back with us in Hangzhou and give us another chance to listen to your teaching?” I am of the opinion that the recipient may have been Philippe Couplet whose Chinese name was Bai Yingli 柏應理 (1642–1693) and who was a missioner for some time in Zhejiang.
The content of the letter is substantially the same as that of the manuscript. It is interesting to note that the scholars had been asked by Intorcetta whether the Jesuit missioners had allowed Catholics to burn paper money or to read sacrificial odes or to perform other superstitious practices. Their reply was that such things had never happened nor had such things ever appeared in their writings. However, at the end of the letter they gave the information that in Jinhua 金華 (i.e., Lanqi 蘭谿) a certain Mr. Zhu had claimed to have heard something different and had tried to lead the faithful to change the rules. According to our three scholars this way of acting could not be tolerated.

Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, pp. 57-58.

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) 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) 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.

Chinese practices related to ancestors have long been the subject of conflicting interpretations. These practices are rooted in the lived experience of practitioners, and therefore need to be considered as embodied expressions of the quest for existential meaning. For practitioners, the achievement of existential meaning requires the inclusion, implication and mediation of the ancestors. When gestures in ancestor rites are analysed from this perspective it is possible to appreciate their essence as constitutive of 'ancestor religion'. This book uses an inquisitive method that investigates the discrepancies between foreign and local explanations, and proposes another hermeneutic framework for ancestor related praxes.--OCLC note.

Rites Controversy: An Illustration of Power Relations in InterpretationConclusion; Chapter 4: "Our" Perspective: The Indigenous Explanation of Ancestor Rites; Introduction; Church- or Christian-Related Native Responses; Chinese Catholic Converts' Contribution to the Rites Controversy; The Sacrifices Were Not Religious; A Lexicology; Apologetics; The Historical Impact of Chinese Converts' Writings; 祭天敬祖: A Chinese Catholic Response to a Crucial Point in the Rites Controversy; Protestant Responses to Ancestor Rites; Awareness of the Problem; Historical Development.

Intro; Preface; Acknowledgments; Contents; Chapter 1: Introduction: Are Ancestors a Problem?; Chapter 2: The Hermeneutic Challenge of Ancestor- Related Practices; Introduction; Conceptual Issues; Hermeneutics; Why Hermeneutics?; Ad hoc or Implicit Hermeneutics; Nicolas Standaert's Hermeneutics of Cultural Encounters; Ancestors; Plural Naming of the Celebrated Remembrance of the Dead; Ancestor Rites; Ancestor Ritual; Ancestor Worship: Ancestor Cult or Ancestor Veneration?; Traditional Religion? Why Not Ancestor Religion ... ; Built-In Structure of Ancestor Rites; Three Interpretative Ingredients.

Interpretation of Ancestor Rituals and Tradition Interpretation and Power; Salvation/Wholeness/Integrity; Conclusion; Chapter 3: The Conflict of Interpretation of Chinese Ancestor Rites; Introduction; Stages of Encounter between Christianity and Chinese Culture; Early Chinese Christianity and the Problem of Ancestor Rites; Ancestor Rites in the Stories of Christian Visitors to the Yuan Dynasty; Matteo Ricci's Perception and Appraisal of Ancestor Rites; Information Related to Ancestor Rites; The Methodological Ground of Ricci's Appraisal of Ancestor Rites.

Concluding Summary of Ricci's Appraisal of Ancestor Rites: One of the Points of the Chinese Rites Controversy; Sinology and the Quest for the Meaning of Chinese Ancestor Rites; An Interpretation in View of Mission; Ancestor Rites: An Attraction for Human Sciences; A Practical Answer to a Theoretical Problem; The Methodological Contribution; The Protestants' Assessment of and Responses to Ancestor Rites; Power Relations and the Appraisal of Ancestor Rites; Political and Institutional Power Relations; Conceptual and Ideological Conditioning.

A Three-Step Pattern in Indigenized Christian Responses-The Three-Step Structure at Work; Concluding Observations on the Protestant Indigenous Response; The Academic Environment; The Core of Chinese Religion (s); Chinese Mainland Scholars' Responses to Foreign Assessments of Ancestor Rituals; Direct Responses; Indirect Responses; A Critical Enrichment of Foreign Interpretations; Concluding Summary of Chinese Indigenous Responses; Chapter 5: Existential Practical Hermeneutics of Ancestor Religion; Introduction; Why Practical or Existential Hermeneutics?--[See OCLC #1020790434]

JapSin I, (38/42) 40/9c
Sangli ailun 喪禮哀論.
By an anonymous author.
Manuscript, folios 135–140. Punctuation in black ink. Chinese bamboo paper, one volume.

Both folio 133 and 135 bear the title in Chinese. The opening paragraph quotes the saying of Cengzi 曾子 (disciple of Confucius and putative author of the Classic of Filial Piety, Xiaojing): “It would be better to offer one’s parents a chicken and a pig while they are still alive than to present a bullock to them after they are dead.” It then goes on to show the absurdity of burning paper money for the dead and suggested that instead one should distribute money to the poor. This kind of merit would be far better than the prayers of Buddhist monks.

Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, p. 59.

JapSin I, (38/42) 42/1
Yishu 易書.
By an anonymous author.
Manuscript, nine folios plus unnumbered cover page. Chinese bamboo paper, one volume. 19.2 x 12.6 cm.

The cover bears the title and a Portuguese inscription: “suma dos textos sinicos | contra | citados do R.P. Fr. Fr^co Varo nos seus papeis; nos mandou o P. | Simão Rodrigues, de Fo cheu.”

Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, pp. 67-68.

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.