Your search

This 1901 diplomatic correspondence, originating from the Portuguese Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ General Directorate of Political and Diplomatic Affairs, concerns ecclesiastical jurisdictional negotiations between Portugal and France regarding territories in China. Dated 16 February 1901 and addressed to a high-ranking official, the document records an agreement reached between the Portuguese and French governments on the reassignment of ecclesiastical authority over Hainan Island, previously under the Diocese of Canton prior to the 1876 arrangement between the Vicar General of Macau and the Apostolic Prefect. The agreement stipulates that, in exchange for returning Hainan to the Diocese of Canton, the Bishop of Macau would gain jurisdiction over the Chao-Shing district adjacent to Shean-Chau, where he already exercised ecclesiastical authority. Two key conditions are noted: the necessity of initiating territorial demarcation procedures pending formal approval by the Holy See, and the provisional nature (provisoria tantum ratione) of the jurisdictional transfer. The French Legation in Lisbon communicated its government’s assent to these terms on 20 December 1900 and again on 13 February 1901. The document further references a communication from the Apostolic Nuncio dated 6 October 1900, conveying the Holy See’s requirement for formal ratification and canonical title before final confirmation. This file, part of Section No. 2, File 51, reflects the intersection of colonial diplomacy, Catholic ecclesiastical administration, and international agreements at the turn of the twentieth century.

This 1907 ecclesiastical and diplomatic correspondence, originating from the Portuguese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Diocese of Macau, and colonial administrative offices, documents the protracted negotiations between the Bishop of Macau and the Apostolic Prefect of Canton concerning the exchange of ecclesiastical jurisdictions over Hainan Island and the Shaoqing (or Shew-ing) district. The dispute arose from the implementation of a 1903 decree by the Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, later clarified by a pontifical rescript of 16 March 1904, which mandated the transfer of Hainan to the jurisdiction of the Apostolic Prefecture of Canton in exchange for the Shaoqing district being assigned to the Diocese of Macau. Despite formal agreement on the territorial exchange, resistance emerged over claims of compensation based on discrepancies in mission property valuations and opposition from French missionaries operating under the Paris Foreign Missions Society. The Bishop of Macau contested demands for financial indemnity, asserting that the papal decrees did not permit such conditions and that prior precedent—specifically the 1874 annexation of Hainan to Macau—had involved no compensation. The file includes official dispatches, telegrams, inventories, and memoranda detailing failed handover attempts, political interventions by the Portuguese and French governments, and the Bishop of Macau’s personal appeal to the Holy See in Rome during 1907. Ultimately, the Holy See reaffirmed the original terms, rejecting additional claims and insisting on the unqualified execution of the jurisdictional exchange. This document provides critical insight into ecclesiastical diplomacy, colonial-era church-state relations, and the interplay between local missionary interests and transnational religious authority in early 20th-century China.

This abstract describes an encrypted official telegram, designated ISR No. 19, dispatched by the Portuguese Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ Cipher Services on 3 January 1968 to the Portuguese Embassy to the Holy See. The document is marked urgent and confidential, with transmission completed via telex at 20:35 after ciphering concluded at 20:00. Its principal subject concerns the relocation of the Diocese of Macau’s archival collection, confirmed as having been transferred in its entirety to Lisbon and deposited at the Oficinas de São José (St Joseph’s Workshops); only recent administrative files remain in Macau under the custody of Bishop D. Paulo for operational purposes. The telegram functions as a final addendum to Telegram No. 1 and bears marginal annotations indicating internal distribution, including a copy intended for an unspecified division and a right-aligned notation “PAA”, alongside an upper-left archival identifier “960472”. Authored by Farinha Fernandes of the Department of Foreign Affairs, the document carries no visible official seal or stamp and is signed solely by the author. It was printed in a run of 20,000 copies by S. & M., Lda. This source provides direct evidence of mid-twentieth-century Portuguese administrative practices concerning ecclesiastical archives in Macau, reflecting institutional coordination between diplomatic, foreign affairs, and religious authorities during the final decades of Portuguese administration.

This is a formal ecclesiastical decree promulgated in 1704 and reaffirmed in 1707 by Charles Thomas Mallare, Patriarch of Antioch and Apostolic Vicar with *legatus a latere* faculties, alongside Brother Beda, Bishop and Most Reverend Provincial of the Neocor Missionaries Apostolic in China and Siam, and later endorsed by Lazarus Carneiro and Francis, Apostolic Vicars of Cambodia. Issued on 7 December 1704 and formally published on 7 February 1707 at Matani Nankiri, the document establishes binding canonical regulations for all missionaries—secular and regular, including Jesuits—serving in the missions of China, Siam, and Cambodia. It addresses five critical questions concerning the compatibility of Chinese and Southeast Asian ritual practices with Catholic doctrine, specifically delineating permissible civil veneration (*veneratio civilis*) of ancestors and cultural rites under strict conditions, while explicitly prohibiting participation in or endorsement of the ‘Sacrifice to Heaven’ (*Conchaji*), state cults (*Dovenis*), veneration of the ‘Tablet of the Ruler of Heaven’ (*T’ien-chu P’ai*), and local folk rituals (*geghili*). The decree invokes papal authority—including decrees of Urban VIII and Clement XI—and imposes automatic excommunication for non-compliance, reserving absolution solely to the Holy See or, in cases of imminent death, to the Society of Jesus under narrowly defined conditions. It constitutes a foundational regulatory text for the Chinese Rites Controversy within the early modern Catholic missionary enterprise.

This 1907–1909 diplomatic and ecclesiastical correspondence, originating from the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of the Colonies, documents the protracted negotiation and eventual transfer of religious jurisdiction over Hainan Island from Portuguese to French Catholic missions. Rooted in the 1857 and 1886 Concordats between the Holy See and Portugal, the dispute centres on the retrocession of Hainan—formally under the Bishop of Macao’s jurisdiction—to the French Apostolic Vicariate of Guangdong, led by Bishop Jean M. Mercier (Mérel). Despite a 1903 decree by the Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith and a clarifying pontifical decree of 16 March 1904 confirming the exchange of Hainan for the Chaoqingfu (Zhaoqing) district—excluding three contested sub-prefectures—the implementation was delayed due to disputes over property valuation and compensation. The Bishop of Macao, d’Azevedo, acknowledged a 41,073 piastre deficit in favour of the French mission, but refused indemnity payments, prompting resistance from Mercier. The file reveals inter-imperial tensions between France and Portugal, with both states leveraging ecclesiastical authority to advance colonial influence in southern China. By October 1908, French missionaries formally assumed control of Hainan, though concerns persisted regarding inadequate financial support, competition from American and German Protestant missions, and the strategic implications for French political influence. The documents provide critical insight into the intersection of religious diplomacy, colonial ambition, and Sino-Vatican relations in late Qing China.

This 1826 administrative document, originating from the Royal College of St Joseph in Macao, China, comprises a formal submission by its Superior, Joaquim José Monteiro Torres, addressed to a high-ranking colonial or ecclesiastical official. The letter transmits an enclosed petition concerning the welfare of missionary activities under the Royal Patronage of the Portuguese Crown, requesting its forwarding to the "Royal Presence" of the August Lord D.º G.º. Signed by both Monteiro Torres and Nuciao Rodrigues Osório de Borja, the document reflects institutional efforts to coordinate ecclesiastical affairs within the Portuguese imperial framework in Asia. Endorsed with marginal annotations indicating administrative routing—specifically instructions to communicate the matter to the Bishop of Macao on 2 April 1827, preceded by earlier notations dating to 23 March and 1 April 1827—the manuscript reveals procedural aspects of colonial governance and church-state relations in the late Portuguese Empire. Originally archived under references linked to the Historical Archive of Portugal (AHU_CU_Índia, Cx. 14, D. 84), the document bears a circular seal associated with Portuguese historical documentation. As a primary source, it provides insight into the bureaucratic mechanisms supporting Catholic missions in Macao during the early 19th century, illustrating the interplay between religious institutions and imperial authority in a colonial Asian context.

This archival document is a composite 17th–18th-century manuscript collection, primarily comprising a Jesuit theological treatise titled *Answers to Twelve Questions or Doubts* (c. 1640), authored by Father Francisco, Vice-Provincial of the Society of Jesus in China, and addressed to Father Frey João Baptista de Morales of the Dominican Order in Manila. It also includes supplementary petitions, certifications, and polemical correspondence dated between 1639 and 1746, notably a 1641 petition by Fray António de Santa Maria of the Franciscan Province of San Gregorio in the Philippines concerning doctrinal disputes over Duns Scotus, and an August 1740 certification issued by Frei Bento de Christo, Governor of the Bishopric of China, authenticating copies for legal use in Macao. The text engages with complex missionary praxis in Qing China, addressing contested practices—including Christian participation in Confucian ancestral rites, baptismal adaptations for women, financial transactions with pagans, and liturgical translations—through extensive theological reasoning grounded in natural law, papal authority, and Scholastic precedent. Key figures include António Rubino (Jesuit Visitor), Francisco Monteiro Sóme (notary in Macau), and Domingos de Ipo (Governor of the Bishopric of China). The material originates from multiple locations: Macao (primary site of composition and authentication), Peking, Hangchow, Nan-chang, and Fo Kien, reflecting the transregional nature of the China mission. Housed in the National Library of Lisbon as part of MSS Box 83, No. 9, the collection serves as critical primary evidence for the history of Catholic missions, inter-order rivalry, and cross-cultural religious accommodation in early modern East Asia.