This paper is a response to Guotong Li’s article in which she argues that Li Zhi (1527–1602), He Qiaoyuan (1557–1633), and Li Guangjin (1549–1623) constituted a fellowship exemplified by their openness toward Islam and endorsement of maritime trade. Adopting a socio-intellectual approach, this paper rebukes the claim that the three scholars can be considered a fellowship. It demonstrates that their varying attitudes toward Buddhism and Islam should be considered in relation to their disparate intellectual dispositions. The paper also calls for a more prudent usage of the term “fellowship,” and examines the Cheng-Zhu Neo-Confucianism revival in the mid-Ming, increasingly the dominant intellectual current in Quanzhou. Through an exploration of how Quanzhou Cheng-Zhu scholars participated in overseas trade as well as their literary commemoration of merchants, the paper supplements Guotong Li’s study of the city’s maritime trade with evidence broader than these three scholars and their Muslim connections. Together, it subscribes to the age-old Confusion tenet of “harmony with diversified views” (he er butong), thereby presenting a nuanced picture of Quanzhou.