| Author | Rodrigues, Simão 李西滿, 1645-1704 |
| Place | Taibei 臺北 |
| Publisher | Taipei Ricci Institute 利氏學社 |
| Collection | Ricci Institute Library |
| Edition | 初版 |
| Language | Chinese 中文 |
| Type | Book |
| Series | Yesuhui Luoma dang'anguan Ming-Qing Tianzhujiao wenxian 耶穌會羅馬檔案館明清天主教文獻 ; 第10冊, Chinese Christian texts from the Roman Archives of the Society of Jesus ; v. 10 |
| Shelf | Hallway Cases |
| Call Number | BX1665.A2 Y47 2002 v. 10 |
| Description | v. 10, pp. 363-438 ; 22 cm. |
| Note | Bianji canping 辨祭參評 / Li Ximan zhu 李西滿著. Title varies slightly ("Bian"). Cover title: 辨祭參評 ; caption and running title: 辯祭參評. No est. auth. for Li Liangjue 李良爵, pref. Li Yifen 李奕芬 (Leontiius), ca. 1635->1706. Cf. Standaert, Handbook of Christianity in China, v. 1., p. 401, 423.
JapSin I, (38/42) 40/5 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 Pa Li si muon. N.B. Li Leantius fuit Siam cum seu Amanuensis et domesticus ac cathechista Illmi D. Maygrot.”At the beginning of the book there is an introduction: 辯 (not 辨 as given on the cover) 祭參評引, dated Kangxi 20 (1681). It states that this book was a discussion between the missioners and the scholars of Fu’an 福安 (Fujian), designed to clarify the meaning of sacrifice. The introduction goes on to say that in the autumn of 1681 the missioner found among his books a manuscript entitled Bianji 辯祭, which, though orthodox in its views, had left out some minor points. Therefore it was necessary to clarify the meaning of sacrifice in order to make declarations. “I therefore committed my explanations orally to Master Li Liangjue. At the end of each question and answer I added one remark; hence the title Bianji canping. Presently I hope to present this book to our Vice-Provincial Father Bi Jia 畢嘉 (Bi Jia refers to Giandomenico Gabiani, zi 鐸民, 1623–1696, Vice-Provincial from May 1680 to June 1683 and from June 1689 to June 1692). Li Liangjue (Li Leontius), according to the Latin inscription, was administrator, secretary and catechist of Mgr. Charles Maigrot (Yan Jiale 嚴加樂, or Yan Dang 嚴當, 1652–1730), Vicar Apostolic of Fujian. For the principal author of this book, Simão Rodrigues, see Jap-Sin I, (38/42) 40/2. The book Bianji was written by Francisco Varo, O.P. (Wan Jiguo 萬濟國, 1627–1687), who came to China in 1649 (cf. Jap-Sin I, 116). It is a refutation of the respect paid to Confucius and the veneration of ancestors. According to Varo true sacrifice can be offered only to God. It would be an usurpation if this sacrifice were offered to any creature. In one of the marginal remarks of the Bianji canping we read: 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.We can see that Simão Rodrigues is cautious in his attitude toward the traditional practice of the Chinese, while Francisco Varo simply weighed the problem from a theologian’s viewpoint and condemned the Chinese practice as superstitious. Hence he argued vehemently against the Liji 禮記 and the interpretation of Zhu Xi 朱熹. Rodrigues in the marginal remarks points out the serious consequences that might result from this antagonism: 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!He proposed that missionaries should go slowly in criticizing; rather they should show their own reasonableness and let the Chinese compare and see their own errors and so be led to the truth (pp. 53–55). There is a summary of the manuscript at the end of this treatise on pages 36 and 37. It was directed against the Bianji of Francisco Varo. Some of the matter in this treatise is taken from the Lishi tiaowen of Yan Mo (Jap-Sin I, [38/42] 40/2; e.g. pp. 20, 21 and 99). Treatises against Francisco Varo’s Bianji were also written by Yan Mo, see Jap-Sin I, (38/42) 40/6a and 41/1. Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, pp. 50-51. |
| Multimedia |  |
| Author | Yan Mo 嚴謨, b.1640? |
| Place | Taibei 臺北 |
| Publisher | Taipei Ricci Institute 利氏學社 |
| Collection | Ricci Institute Library |
| Edition | 初版 |
| Language | Chinese 中文 |
| Type | Book |
| Series | Chinese Christian texts from the Roman Archives of the Society of Jesus ; v. 11, Yesuhui Luoma dang'anguan Ming-Qing Tianzhujiao wenxian 耶穌會羅馬檔案館明清天主教文獻 ; 第11冊 |
| Shelf | Hallway Cases |
| Call Number | BX1665.A2 Y47 2002 v. 11 |
| Description | pp.47-60 ; 22 cm. |
| Note | Bianji 辨祭 : [jinqi chaoben 近期抄本] / [Yan Mo zhu 嚴謨著].
JapSin I, (38/42) 40/6a 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. Franco Varo. 3o M.S. Sinico.”The beginning of folio 1 gives the title Bianji 辨祭, with two lines in small characters: 此辨字別也非原辯字駁也 (Here the character 辨 has the meaning “to distinguish,” not 辯, as is found in the original [of Varo’s work], which means “to find fault with”). Below it there is the inscription: “Exposed by Paul Yan Mo, native of Zhangzhou and a disciple of the holy [Catholic] religion.” The first paragraph of the manuscript serves as a preface in which the author explains why the book was written. He criticized the Bianji of Varo, while recognizing it as a book full of zeal and of good intentions. He laments that the author did not fully understand Chinese tradition and says that this is the source of his mistakes. “When one wishes to discuss the word sacrifice one must first make distinction about what sacrifice means 愈謂欲辯祭先當辨祭 (pp.1–2). The manuscript gives in great detail the meaning of the character ji 祭 (sacrifice). There is a wide sense of the word sacrifice and a strict sense. Sacrifice in the strict sense comes from the interior of the soul and is expressed by external rites; even this can be divided into different categories. He then makes clear that in offering sacrifice to God one employs the proper ritual that is due to God, such as we see in the sacrifice of the Mass which can be performed only by the priests. Again in the old days the jiaotian 郊天 (sacrifice to Heaven) was offered only by the emperor. There is also the sacrifice made to the ancestors. This is a ceremony directed to one’s own ancestors, as we see them done nowadays. These are quite different from one another. In the case of the last it is sufficient to know that the veneration for ancestors comes from filial piety and has nothing to do with praying for blessings - which would be an usurpation indeed. There is no need to worry excessively or to give wrong interpretations. It was the common opinion of the Christian scholars of the time that a number of the European missioners neglected the study of Chinese writings, and that this had led to wrong interpretations of Chinese usages. Yan Mo was only one of these scholars. Here is what he had to say on Francisco Varo: 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!Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, pp. 51-52. |
| Multimedia | |
| Author | Zhang Xingyao 張星曜, b.1633 |
| Place | Taibei 臺北 |
| Publisher | Taipei Ricci Institute 利氏學社 |
| Collection | Ricci Institute Library |
| Edition | 初版 |
| Language | Chinese 中文 |
| Type | Book |
| Series | Yesuhui Luoma dang'anguan Ming-Qing Tianzhujiao wenxian 耶穌會羅馬檔案館明清天主教文獻 ; 第10冊, Chinese Christian texts from the Roman Archives of the Society of Jesus ; v. 10 |
| Shelf | Hallway Cases |
| Call Number | BX1665.A2 Y47 2002 v. 10 |
| Description | p. 439-458 ; 22 cm. |
| Note | Sidian shuo 祀典說 / [Zhang Xingyao zhu 張星曜著].
JapSin I, (38/42) 40/7a The cover bears the title and a Portuguese inscription: “Este he obra de un Letrado de Hoan cheu. A mandou o P. Intorcetta.”At the top of the first folio the title Sidian shuo (on the ritual of sacrifice) is given; below it are the following two lines: 神祠 (shenci, shrines of deities), 生祠 (shengci, shrines set up in honor of living persons), 綠位 (luwei, shrines set up for living persons in gratitude of favors received), 家廟 (jiamiao, family halls) | Yinazi Zhang Xingyao 依納子張星曜, Renhe 仁和. The Sidian shuo quotes from different writings in order to censure the improper practices of (shenci, shengci and luwei. However, Zhang greatly favored the erection of the family hall and gives four reasons for it. The ancestor tablets are also necessary. He argues that a censure of these two things might lead the pagans to criticize Catholics for their want of filial piety. The sources used by Zhang are: Shujing 書經, Liji 禮記, Shijing 詩經, Xiaojing 孝經, Lunyu 論語, Mengzi 孟子, Jiali 家禮, Huidian 會典, Tongjian 通鑑, Shiji 史記, Hanshu 漢書, Yitong zhi 一統志, the wenji 文集 (collected works of scholars) and the Qike 七克 by Pang Diwo 龐迪我 (Diego de Pantoja, 1571–1618). Throughout the manuscript the term Shangdi 上帝 is used for God. Though the dispute over the question of the Chinese Rites had started, there had not yet been a definite decision forbidding the use of this term; hence Catholic authors were still free to retain it in their writings.
Zhang Xingyao (zi 虎臣, hao Yinazi 依納子 [Ignatius]), was a native of Hangzhou and came from a scholar family. His father Zhang Fuyan 傅岩 (zi 殷甫, hao 伯雨) had been a disciple of Michael Yang Tingyun 楊廷筠. Zhang Xingyao was baptized about the year 1678 (Kangxi 17). In 1689 (Kangxi 28) he and his countryman Hong Ji 洪濟 published the Piwang 闢妄 of Xu Guangqi and appended to it a small treatise, written by them together, entitled Piwang lüeshuo tiaobo 闢妄略說條駁 (cf. Jap-Sin I, 132a). 1. The Catholic religion is in harmony with Confucianism. The preface by the author is dated 1702. The introductory note (bianyan 弁言), however, was written in 1715, when Zhang Xingyao was 83 sui. So we know that Zhang was born in 1633 (Chongzhen 6). Source: Albert Chan, SJ, Chinese Books and Documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, pp. 53-55. |
| Multimedia | |
