Chinese rites controversy

韓琦：《南巡、傳教士和外交——兼論康熙對禮儀之爭和教廷特使多羅來華的反應》，《文化雜誌》，總102期，第57-65頁。

1684年至1707年間，康熙皇帝曾六次南巡。康熙不僅巡視河工、祭拜孔子與明陵，考察官員，瞭解民情，同時也藉機籠絡江南漢族士大夫。本文將根據國內和歐洲所藏文獻和檔案，揭示南巡過程中康熙與傳教士的互動，並重點討論最後一次南巡（1707），分析康熙、直郡王和內務府官員在處理禮儀之爭時對教廷特使多羅（Carlo Tommaso Maillard de Tournon, 1668-1710）來華和傳教士的態度。

In 1684, one of these missionaries, Philippe Couplet, returned to Rome on a mission to ask approval for Chinese rites and a Chinese clergy. On the one hand, he brought Chinese young people to show the Propaganda Fide and the Roman Curia that there were outstanding candidates for the priesthood. On the other, he brought more than four hundred Chinese missionary books including the Chinese Roman Missal, Ritual and Breviary ready for a Chinese rite. All of this testified to the great efforts of the Jesuit missionaries in China. With the generous support of Candida Xu, Couplet had collected all of the books the Jesuit missionaries had published up to that time, except those destroyed during persecutions: in all 414 books — today most of them are preserved in the Chinese collections of the Vatican Library.
This paper will consider mainly these Chinese books written, translated and published by the Jesuit missionaries in China, from the beginning of the modern Catholic mission to China, up to the late 17th century. To provide a context for these books, this  paper will give a brief introduction to the general situation of the China mission at the beginning of the Rites Controversy as background for Couplet's trip to Europe. These books have been witnesses to and an intermediary of their work in China. In China these books were the means of introducing and disseminating European theology, sciences and technology in the empire. The arrival of these books in Europe was important for the Chinese clergy and rites, and influenced European theologians and philosophers. These books are a central focus of any study of the Rites Controversy. They entered the Vatican Library, and formed the first collection of its Chinese missionary holdings. It is one of the few such library holdings in the world today, offering first hand sources for the study of the history of the Church in China to scholars from all over the world. Thus, this paper will give a brief introduction to the library and its Chinese collections as well.

公元十七世紀至十八世紀的中國禮儀之爭，是天主教在華
傳教史上一個重要的轉折，其中牽涉到清朝與梵蒂岡、不同修會
的傳教士和中國基督徒，其直接後果是清朝長達百年的禁教，傳
教活動被迫中止或轉到地下。本文使用新近出版的許多史料，對
此複雜的事件和人物進行梳理，指出禮儀之爭的遠因是耶穌會與
道明會夾在葡萄牙與西班牙的「保教權」角力之中，而且兩個修
會長久以來在神學觀念和傳教方法上存在分歧；近因是在華傳教
的不同修會傳教士之間對天主教用語的翻譯，以至中國教徒應否
參與祭祖祀孔的爭論。本文還強調，羅馬教廷的決策過程及其派
遣到中國的使者人選，也對禮儀之爭的白熱化起了重要作用。
he study introduces the major developments of the Chinese Rites Controversy (XVII-XVIII centuries), which had a devastating impact on China missionary endeavor. Special attention is given to religious and ideological background of the various missionary groups, to personalities involved in the controversy and to the Chinese converts and officials.
The Rites controversy initiated in Fujian province in mid 1635, when newly arrived Dominican and Franciscan missionaries objected to the method of the Jesuits, introduced in China by Matteo Ricci S.J., and in Fujian by Giulio Aleni S.J. The Holy See was called in to declare whether the participation in the ancestral Rites was permissible for the Christians. Rome was unable to make a clear cut decision, and the controversy dragged on for several decades.
After the prohibition to the Rites issued by the Apostolic Vicar of Fujian Charles Maigrot MEP (1693) the Controversy regained momentum, with the personal involvement of China’s Emperor Kangxi and pope Clement XI. The Controversy reached an incredible level of complication and animosity. A vast amount of writings by clergy and intellectuals alike, were produces in China and in Europe. The two Papal Legations to China (XVII century) could not defuse the tension between Beijing and Rome, and among the various missionary groups. Actually the Legations, and the Roman decisions, added to the ambiguity, exasperation and bitterness.
From 1704, when pope Clement XI condemned the Rites, it was clear that Holy See was determined to disapprove the Rites, but also to save the China Mission from destruction. But the two objectives were not compatible. In 1742 Benedict XV condemned in the most solemn way the Rites, putting to a definitive end not only to the century-long controversy, but also to the China Mission initiated by Matteo Ricci, and indeed, creating the premises to the same suppression of the Society of Jesus (1773).
In 1939, due to the influence of Holy See Delegate to China Celso Costantini, the prohibition on the Rites is dramatically reversed.

The article tries to highlight the points of contact between the three principal controversies which have torn apart Catholic missions in the East in early modern times : the question of the Confucian rites practiced by Chinese neophytes, the acceptance of practices of caste distinction in the religious life of Indian Christians and the problem of communicatio in sacris in the Ottoman Empire and Persia. It seems possible to identify a conceptual unity in these three questions, in relation to the theoretical issues discussed ; a chronological unity, which is achieved in the altogether similar unfolding of the controversies ; and finally a unity with regard to the actors involved and their strategies of confrontation. Under this respect, the use of biblical references is of particular importance because of the fundamental role they played in the argumentation of missionaries, canonists and consultors of the Holy Office. By analysing a particularly significant example, the episode of Naaman the Syrian (2 R 5,17-19), the article illustrates the interweaving and overlapping of questions arising from missions distant in time and space.

The Jesuit François Noël was involved in the Chinese Rites Controversy. On his two trips between China and Europe he not only brought a whole collection of Chinese books to Rome (today in the Jesuit Archives in Rome), but also tried to prove that the ancient and the modern Chinese were no Atheists, but believed in the one true God.

Giulio Aleni wrote the biography of Matteo Ricci in Chinese in Fuzhou in 1630, twenty years after the death of the founder of the Jesuit mission in China. Aleni's work is a fundamental document for studying Ricci and Jesuit mission from a Chinese viewpoint. Aleni named 55 Chinese officials and scholars who met Ricci. Aleni informs that Ricci kept a diary containing his spiritual musings, and many other precious information that are not found in other sources. The 1630's edition includes other important documents, such as an after-word by Li Jubiao, a short biography of Ricci by Zhang Weishu, high official Wu Daoan's supplication for a piece of land to bury Ricci, and a tomb inscription in honour of Ricci by Wang Yinglin
要旨 ジュリオ・アレーニは中国でのイエズス会創設者マテオ・リッチの没後20年にあたる 1630年に福州にて中国語で彼の伝記を書いた。アレーニの作品は、中国人の視点からリ ッチとイエズス会宣教師を研究する際の基本的文書となっている。アレーニはリッチ が、精神的な憂慮、他の情報源にはない多数の貴重な情報を含む日記をつけていたこと を伝える。1630年版には、Li Jubiaoによる後記、Zhang Weishuによるリッチの短い伝 記、リッチを埋葬するための土地を請う高官のWu Daoanの嘆願、Wang Yinglinによるリ ッチを敬う墓碑銘といった重要な文書が含まれる。

韓琦：《康熙時代的江南天主教徒與“禮儀之爭”》，《國際漢學》2021年第3期（總第28期），頁83-93。

The Chinese Rites Controversy was an important event in the history of Sino-Western relation in the Qing dynasty, in which Chinese Christians played an important role. Based on the new historical documents found in the Jesuit Archive in Rome, this article discusses in detail the religious activities of Chinese Catholics in Jiangnan, their views on the worship of Confucius and ancestors, and their relationship with the Jesuit missionaries, thus revealing the network of Catholic communication in the Kangxi reign.

“禮儀之爭”是清代中西關係史上重要事件，中國教徒在其中扮演了重要角色。本文根據歐洲所藏第一手史料，深入探討了康熙時代江南教徒的宗教活動，特別是 1700—1702年間他們在“禮儀之爭”中扮演的角色，對祭孔、祭祖的看法，與耶穌會士的關係，進而揭示了康熙時代天主教傳播的關係網絡。

“European and Chinese Controversies over Rituals: A Seventeenth-century Genealogy of Chinese Religion.” In Bruno Boute and Thomas Smålberg, eds., Devising Order. Socio-religious Models, Rituals, and the Performativity of Practice, Leiden: Brill, 2013, pp. 193-222.

韓琦：“奉教天文學家與‘禮儀之爭’(1700-1702)” ，卓新平主編《相遇與對話：明末清初中西文化交流國際學術研討會文集》，北京：宗教文化出版社，2003：381-399.。
【Traditional Chinese Character Version】“奉教天文學家與‘禮儀之爭’(1700-1702)” ，Wu Xiaoxin ed., Encounters and Dialogues: Changing Perspectives on Chinese-Western Exchanges from the Sixteenth and Eighteenth Centuries, Nettetal: Steyler Verlag, 2005: 197-209.

It is usually acknowledged that since Colonialist times, Asian ways of thinking were described as weak, irrational, immoral, and thus different and inferior to western ones (see Said). However, this secular–not religious–definition of weakness was already fully in display during the second half of the Seventeenth and early Eighteenth century, when missionary materials became easily available and the “Chinese rites controversy” blew up, overturning Jesuit appraisal of Confucian wisdom.
What we want to show in this article is that seeds of this deprecation are already apparent in Ricci's accommodation method, which is evident when we focus on the rejection of Buddhism rather than the more renowned appreciation of Confucianism. In a quite neglected Jesuit text composed in late Ming China, i.e. Posthumous Disputes (Bianxue yidu 辯學遺牘), we can read a Christian rejection of Buddhist pillars based on perfectly secular probative arguments, instead of aspects we could assume as typically Christian, namely the power of revelation, grace, love, miracles and spirituality. Buddhism is to be expelled from China because of its irrationality, illogicality and uselessness. Buddhist doctrine completely lacks empirical verification. Furthermore, Buddhist principles are against the good ruling of a country.

According to our opinion, this description of Buddhism already discloses the reasons for the later rejection of all Chinese ways of thinking–Confucianism included–which we used to date to the late Enlightenment and particularly the Colonialist epoch, as for instance in Hegelism and Kantism.

Indexed in Chinese Christian Text Database no. 14206 http://heron-net.be/pa_cct/index.php/Detail/objects/14750

La pubblicazione si presenta senz’altro come un risultato importante, significativo e molto opportuno per fare il punto su un tema – “la controversia dei riti” – che negli ultimi anni ha ricevuto una notevole attenzione storiografica e, con questa, un considerevole aggiornamento degli studi a riguardo di questo importante nodo storico (ma anche etno-antropologico) della prima Età Moderna.
In termini generali e nella misura in cui pone al suo centro la polemica dei riti, questo volume è dedicato ampiamente al contesto asiatico (soprattutto quello cinese e indiano) con un excursus complementare riguardante il contesto coloniale sud-americano. In questi contesti e nei diversi contributi di questo libro, in stretta connessione con la centralità della controversia in questione, troviamo presenti altri temi decisamente indissociabili: 1) le importanti problematiche linguistiche e di traduzioni; 2) le interpretazioni coeve, ed una loro odierna rilettura, dei rituali attorno ai quali si inscrivono le dimensioni della polemica; 3) dimensioni, quest’ultime, che si rivelano in quanto strumenti di reciproche traduzioni e di interculturalità, di conflitti (dipendendo dai vari punti di vista: missionari, teologici, locali, romani e/o inquisitoriali) tra meccanismi di accomodamenti ortopratici e ortodossie; 4) il tutto colto, percepito e/o interpretato in quanto modi di supporti referenziali per letture dei costumi di alterità che si inscrivevano in un’opposizione caratteristica: in prospettiva civile (politica) o sub specie religionis!

Newspapers in the Dutch Republic frequently reported on China, thereby informing readers not only about events happening in the Middle Kingdom, but especially about those developments that would have an impact on Europe. The Chinese Rites controversy occupied many a newspaper sheet during the second half of the seventeenth century, and the case of Louis Le Comte and the condemnation of his book by the Theology Faculty of the Sorbonne in Paris serves as a case-study to show that newspapers in the Dutch Republic often gave different accounts of the same event, even though the available information was the same.

The pipe organ first appeared in China in 1599/1600 with a positive organ built in Macau. This was not meant to be a liturgical instrument, but rather a sample of Western technology and ingenuity. During the eventful reign of the Kangxi emperor (r. 1661-1722) the pipe organ enjoyed a privileged position at the imperial court due to Kangxi’s personal fascination with and appreciation of the instrument (if not its European repertoire). While the presence of the pipe organ in the earlier part of his reign has been documented by a number of scholars, its position during the worst years of the Rites Controversy in the first quarter of the eighteenth century has been less well-understood. This paper discusses this period, especially from the arrival in Beijing of Cardinal Maillard de Tournon in 1705 to the death of Kangxi in 1722. Even while the Controversy raged, undermining in the process Kangxi’s opinion of the whole Christian mission in general, the pipe organ nevertheless made further inroads in China as a sample of Western science, art, religion, and culture. At the same time, it began a gradual transition in perception (as well as reality) from an artifact of foreign tribute to a transcultural commodity.

ABSTRACT The funeral practices promoted by the European Catholic missionaries in China provide an interesting example of the adaptation of the Asian world in the 17th and 18th century. In this scope one must highlight the speciic problem of the worship of the ancestors and more speciically the design of the spirit tablets for this purpose. The movement of the Chinese population and of the missionaries between the continent and other Christian settlements in Asia facilitated the arrival of these models to territories such as the Philippines. Yet in this archipelago, the prolonged establishment of other religious orders in a radically distinct context came to prohibit the use of said models.

This paper explains how two Jesuits reacted very differently to the difficulties caused by the Rites controversy in the Chinese empire, despite similar experiences and background.
Agostino Cappelli (Ascoli, 1679 - Malabar, 1715) and Ludovico Gonzaga (Mantua, 1673 - Macao, 1718) promised the General they were ready to do anything to be sent to the East Indies missions. Cappelli wrote one of his candidacies with blood, while Gonzaga, on the other hand, proclaimed that while he wished to go to China he would prefer Japan in order to be martyred there.
Both men had the fortunate fate of seeing their request accepted, and arrived in Macau in 1707. Five years before, Cardinal Charles Tournon de Maillard had been dispatched from Rome to China to inform the Jesuits that they could no longer practice their accomodatio (adaptation) and that any new converts had to publicly refuse the Chinese rites honoring Confucius and their ancestors. The Chinese emperor became irrate and sent Tournon back to Europe, passing though Macau. There, Cappelli befriended the cardinal and agreed with his position, believing that Jesuit had to obey to the Pope and not to the emperor—even if this meant rejecting years of successful practices.
Gonzaga was sent to Beijing as an imperial mathematician and his opinions about the Rites controversy were very different from Cappelli’s.Thanks to his friendship with Tournon, the latter was moved to India, leaving behind a trail of criticism from the confreres who saw him as a traitor. From the Chinese capital, Gonzaga could do nothing but complain his Jesuit brother’s behavior and desperately hope, in vane, for a positive outcome for the Society of Jesus in the Rites controversy. Choosing the “right” side was, in those years, very hard for individual Jesuits, almost a bet, because no one could know how the matter would end.