A corporal work of mercy.

A corporal work of mercy.
Click on photo for this corporal work of mercy!

Tuesday 9 August 2016

The Vatican sells out the real Catholics of China

Looks as if I was right!

And here:


And here:

St. Augustine Zhao Rong & Companions, Ora Pro Nobis! Chinese Martyrs.

Is the sell-out of Mindzenty and Slipyj for "Ostpolitik" about to be repeated in China?

Originally published on March 27, 2015.

Last week, a friend with strong ties to various figures in the Holy See told me over lunch something brewing on the front-burner in Rome. I was sworn to refrain from blogging and even now, cannot say more that I know but there is a story made public earlier this week by Sandro Magister. 

Is this potential of diplomatic relations between The Holy See and the communist People's Republic of China something which we've seen this before? Is history is repeating itself?

Is the Ostpolitik of Paul VI and the sell-out of Hungary and Ukraine and the great Cardinals Mindzenty and Slipyj about to repeated by making a deal with the devil himself?

Is the persecution of Roman Catholics in the People's Republic of China to be ignored for the sake of diplomatic prestige and convenience?

Are the Vatican diplomats, held at bay by Benedict XVI, ready to put before Pope Francis the selling out of millions of Catholic bishops, priests, religious and laity who gave up their lives for their faith rather than submit to the communist devils?

What is the price for relations with China?

What will this mean for the Nunciature in Taiwan and the Catholics there?

Click above for link to Ignatuis Press
Will the Church recognise these schismatic bishop of the Chinese Patriotic Association who sold-out to the communists and still not find a way for the good bishops and priests and religious of the Society of St. Pius X to find a sure way home and a secure structure in which to evangelise?

What would relations with China mean for its evil "one-child policy" and forced abortion upon women? Will the Church demand it be dropped for recognition and diplomatic relations?

What would it mean for the real Catholic Church in China, that which is underground; will they become the new schismatics?

What of the opinion of the great Emeritus Cardinal Zen of Hong Kong; who says, "no agreement is better than a bad agreement? 

Are we about to see the Catholic Church make an equivalent deal as Obama with Iran on nuclear weapons for the sake of an agreement?

Perhaps there has been too much reading around the Vatican of Mao's Little Red Book and not enough about The Red Book of Chinese Martyrs.


The Cardinals Are Dueling Over China, but the Mandarins Dominate the Game“No agreement is better than a bad agreement,” says Zen, criticizing secretary of state Parolin. The pope is keeping silent. And Shanghai remains without its bishop, under arrest for three years
by Sandro Magister

ROME, March 25, 2015 – “Do I want to go to China? Absolutely: tomorrow! All the Church is asking for is freedom for its mission, no other condition." This is what Francis said on August 18 of last year, while he was crossing over Chinese airspace, the first time any pope had done so.
Seven months have gone by since then, and the statements of readiness for “fruitful dialogue” have multiplied. On the Vatican side, with the voices of cardinal secretary of state Pietro Parolin and of Fr. Federico Lombardi. And on the Chinese side from the mouth of the spokesmen of the foreign ministry, Hua Chunying and Hong Lei.
At the beginning of March Fr. Lombardi granted a long interview to Phoenix TV, a Hong Kong television channel close to the central government. In it, among other things, he expressed hopes for an agreement on episcopal ordinations in China similar to the one in place in Vietnam – set up by none other than Parolin when he was undersecretary for relations with states – in which the Holy See presents its candidate to the government and if this does not approve presents another, until there is agreement on both sides.
In the name of the Chinese foreign ministry, spokesman Hong Lei echoed the interview with Fr. Lombardi with soothing statements released to the English-language newspaper “Global Times,” an outlet of the communist party. These were accompanied, however, by this tap on the brakes:
“Beijing on Thursday [March 12] urged the Vatican to face the historical tradition and reality of Catholics in China, after the Vatican reportedly suggested a joint review on bishop ordination.”
In effect, the ordinations of bishops are a crucial question for the Catholic Church in China. With Mao Zedong in the 1950’s the communist authorities appropriated the appointment of bishops, creating the structures of a Church subservient to the regime, independent of Rome and potentially schismatic, as well as being in conflict with the Chinese bishops and priests faithful to the pope but not recognized by the government and therefore in a situation of permanent illegality and of dramatic vulnerability.
After the end of Maoism, the Holy See succeeded in reconciling some of the illegitimate bishops with itself. But the authorities of Beijing never abandoned the “tradition” inaugurated by Mao, which continues to have its executive and supervisory body in the so-called patriotic association of Chinese Catholics and its formal expression in a puppet episcopal conference never recognized by Rome.
Vatican efforts to reconstruct the unity and fidelity of the Chinese Church reached their peak with the publication in 2007 of a letter from Pope Benedict XVI to the Catholics of China, a document that Pope Francis has confirmed, calling it “fundamental” and “timely” and thereby accepting its guidelines:
That year Benedict XVI also set up a commission expressly dedicated to examining the case of China, made up of officials of the secretariat of state and of the congregation for the evangelization of peoples, of representatives of the Chinese bishops, of missionaries and experts. The commission met periodically and there was a prominent role on it for Hong King cardinal Joseph Zen Ze-kiun.
But the Chinese authorities continued to ordain bishops not recognized by Rome. The latest two, installed in 2011 in the dioceses of Leshan and Shantou, were excommunicated by the Holy See, which also asked the bishops who had taken part in the illicit ordinations to justify their actions, on pain of excommunication for them as well.
The following year came the most spectacular case, that of the new coadjutor bishop of the archdiocese of Shanghai, Thaddeus Ma Daqin. Ordained on July 7 of 2012 with the approval of both the Holy See and the Chinese government, he quit the patriotic association on the same day, obeying the 2007 letter of Benedict XVI, which defined membership in the association as incompatible with fidelity to the Church. And because of this he was immediately punished with house arrest, which made it impossible for him to take up the succession of the elderly archbishop of Shanghai, Aloysius Jin Luxian, who died in April of 2013.Since then the diocese of Shanghai has remained headless, with its legitimate bishop still under house arrest, bearing witness at a high price to fidelity to the universal Church.
But meanwhile the pope has changed. Benedict XVI has been succeeded by Francis. And the diplomats have regained power in the Vatican.
With the new pope, the commission for China has not been convened again. The combative approach of confrontation with the regime embodied by Cardinal Zen has been replaced with an approach of reiterated offerings of dialogue and of silence on the painful points.
To their own advantage, the proponents of this diplomatic approach attribute to themselves the cessation of the appointment of illegitimate bishops since 2012.
But on the part of Rome, the appointments of faithful bishops have also ceased. With the consequence of a growing number of dioceses deprived of leadership.
The resumption of illegitimate ordinations also continues to hang like a sword of Damocles. Last January it was the ministry of religious affairs that threatened a new batch of appointments without papal mandate in 2015.From what has leaked out, the Vatican authorities are trying to coax Beijing into an agreement on the appointment of bishops according to the model of Vietnam.
And in order to reach this goal they are willing to keep public silence on everything. Even on the most offensive prevarications of the Chinese authorities toward the Catholic Church.
Silence on the enduring impediment on the bishop of Shanghai’s exercising his office.
Silence on the disappearance of Bishop Cosma Shi Enxiang of Yixian, in Hebei, arrested on Good Friday of 2001 and imprisoned in an unknown location. Last January 30 his relatives were given the news of his death, at the age of 93, news that was afterward retracted confusedly and without explanation.
Silence on the disappearance of another bishop, James Su Zhi-min of Baoding, taken away by the police 18 years ago and never heard from again.
The official Vatican media are silent on everything that could irritate the Chinese authorities. For information on the persecution of the Church in China, the most timely and trustworthy Catholic source is the online agency “Asia News," published in Italian, English, and Chinese, founded and directed by Fr. Bernardo Cervellera of the Pontifical Institute for Foreign Missions.
On the other hand, beating the drum with boundless optimism for the approach currently adopted by the Vatican diplomats is the journalist and expert on China Gianni Valente, a friend of Jorge Mario Bergoglio from before his election as pope and a writer for “Fides,” the online agency of the Vatican congregation for the evangelization of peoples, as well as being a prominent contributor to the portal “Vatican Insider.”
The historical model to which Valente refers, in dealing with the question of China, is the “Ostpolitik” practiced by the Vatican with the regimes of the Soviet empire, overlooking the fact that at the time this diplomatic stance was balanced and ultimately supplanted by the different approach that had in John Paul II its victorious protagonist.
And also today the diplomatic steps underway in China do not fail to raise criticisms.The most explicit and authoritative of these come from Cardinal Zen, who gave a lively reaction last February 17 to two interviews - with “leading questions,” according to him - conducted by Valente for “Vatican Insider” with two Chinese bishops in communion with Rome:
 Zen: It looks like someone is trying to shout us down 
Referring explicitly to secretary of state Parolin, Zen warned against concession: “No agreement is better than a bad agreement. We cannot, pro bono pacis, tolerate an agreement which betrays our identity.”
This was followed by another interview “steered” by Valente with a third Chinese bishop. And also the publication, by “Vatican Insider,” of a stinging “ad personam” invective against Cardinal Zen, signed by a Chinese priest and blogger, Paul Han Qing Ping:
> "Cardinal Zen, don’t you believe in miracles?"
And then again by a defense on Valente’s part of the Vietnam model in the appointment of bishops. The limitations of which were however brought to light by “Asia News,” in a letter from a Vietnamese Catholic and above all in an editorial by Fr. Cervellera on the grave risks of the Vatican’s striking a diplomatic agreement without first establishing commitments in terms of religious freedom:
> Nothing to toast between China and the Vatican: Beijing wants complete control
Freedom for the Church, without conditions, is exactly what Pope Francis has said that he wants, in his most explicit statement on China so far, seven months ago.
After which he has said nothing more about this. On January 19, flying over China for a second time, he limited himself to saying, after justifying the lack of an audience with the Dalai Lama: “The Chinese government is considerate, and we too are considerate and do things step by step, as things are done in history.”
Not one word on China, not even in the speech that the pope had given to the diplomatic corps a week before.

The guidelines of the 2007 letter of Benedict XVI are still in place. But between Parolin and Zen, Francis seems to side with the former.

The three interviews of Gianni Valente with the three Chinese bishops criticized by Cardinal Zen:
> Joseph Wei Jingyi, Bishop of Qiqihar
> Joseph Han Zhi-hai, Bishop of Lanzhou
> Paul Xie Ting-zhe, Bishop of Urumqi

All of the previous articles on this topic:
> Focus on CHINA
In the photo, Cardinal Zen, behind the banner, demonstrates in Hong Kong for the truth on the disappearance of Bishop Cosma Shi Enxiang.


Dorota said...

The humble pope might just desire to save the world with peace and friendship of all with all. Some will have to be re-educated with the new and improved concepts of tolerance and mercy - for the good of the collective and mother earth. Jesus Christ might have to become a wise teacher, not God. We might become our own gods, and we might democratically overthrow God's Word by conducting surveys and going with the voice of the majority. Let us remember - the real numbers don't matter. What matters is who counts the votes.

Cdn Catholic said...

I can't say I'm surprised. Not long ago around the time of the 25th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall the Secretariat of State was still trying to take credit for the end of communism.

Interestingly, even when JPII was by then old and sick with Parkinson's, the Chinese government were still so scared of him that they wouldn't let him in the country.

Anonymous said...

This is why we need the revelation of the Third Secret of Fatima (I.e., the exact words of Our Lady which follow "In Portugal, the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved...) - so that Ostpolitik and the liberalism which has dominated the Church for the past 50+ years will finally come to an end.

St. Josaphat, Martyr of the Holy Union, pray for us!
All you Holy Martyrs of Ukraine and China, pray for us!

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

Extremely disturbing. This is not merely a diplomatic arrangement -- it subjugates the Church to an atheistic and philosophically hostile foreign government.

On a broader level, it betrays the principle of freedom of religion, both for the Institution and the individual (every Chinese Christian). It gives justification, in the name of political cooperation, to Church support for the goals of a secular society and state.

Sounds theoretical? Just imagine if the government of the United States had such an agreement? Imagine the appointments of bishops Burke, Poprocki, Vasa, Cordeleone, Jenky, or Sample having to be "accepted" by the Obama administration? Would the Church even be able to consecrate an authentic pro-life, conservative or traditional bishop?

Seems impossible? China will set a precedent for Church dominance by a large and prosperous nation. The USA is already a "post-christian" nation. Our government has already outlawed matrimony, enshrined abortion, and embraced socialism. Every year the masses "believe" more completely in State as the new god. Orwell's 1984 has come and gone; one reason most folks don't know they are not actually free is ours is a "soft" totalitarianism.

In this milieu, why not create more "efficiency" and "harmony" in international relations by "streamlining" the hierarchy with a "mutual understanding" between DC and Rome? Think of the wonderful visions of world peace to be painted for the masses by CNN experts and NYT columnists as this "bold new idea" catches on?

If the RCC will just "modernize" a bit and get with this "innovative" Parolin process, it will show the pope is a "real player" on the "world stage"! It's the best 21st century way to "cooperate" to eliminate poverty, expand inclusiveness, and stop global warming!

DJR said...

It is an established fact that priests of the communist, proabortion "Patriotic Association," so called, were given faculties to administer to Catholics in U.S. parishes while at the same time priests of the Society of Saint Pius X were suspended.

The Wanderer and the Cardinal Kung Foundation reported on that extensively back in the 80s and even knew which priests were involved and where they were. And there were U.S. bishops who acknowledged it as well.

It is a travesty of monumental proportions. The Church militant is in a mess right now.

Aged parent said...

Apparently the Church has no problem with schismatics after all - as long as they are Rome's kind of schismatics.