 |
| Communist appointed bishop in 2010 |
Last March 2015, I wrote about what I see as a sell-out by the Vatican of the faithful Catholics of China, the real Bishops and the great Martyrs against Communism. It is a reminder of the Ostpolitik of John XXIII and Paul VI which sold out the great Cardinals Mindzenty and Slipyj and millions of others behind the old Iron Curtain.
I have reposted the article one below this and a post from the great Cardinal Zen, Emeritus of Hong Kong. It is a wake-up call for these Romans who would cede to the atheistic communists the authority to suggest bishops with the Pope becoming no more than a rubber stamp.
This papacy and the malefactors behind it must be called out for this betrayal of the Church in China and the tens of thousands of faithful who endure the persecution as well as the faithful bishops and priests who minister to them and are persecuted for the Faith.
They will pay dearly in eternity for this crime.
What will 2016 bring the
Church in China
by Cardinal
Joseph Zen Zi-kiun
I have not spoken about the Church in China on my blog for
some time now. Certainly not because I am too busy to do so (busy as I may be,
I will never lose interest of our Church in China), not because I fear
criticism of my ideas (at my age I have nothing to gain or lose).
No, the problem is that I'd like to give some good news,
but, as you will note, my fate is that of the prophet Jeremiah. I have searched
at length for some good news, but have found none. I realise that during this
season of Christmas and the New Year, my complaints are somewhat “extra
chorum", but I cannot be a dog without a bark.
A.
I remember that at the beginning of last year the newspaper
Wen Wei Po announced jubilantly that "relations between China and the
Vatican will soon have a good development." Soon after, the Vatican
Secretary of State said that "the prospects are promising, there is a
desire for dialogue on both sides." I had my doubts about this unexpected
wave of optimism, I saw no basis for this optimism. More than a thousand
crosses were removed from the top of the churches (in some cases the churches
themselves have been destroyed). After so long, we can no longer delude
ourselves that this was anything beyond an episode of some local official’s
exaggerated zeal. Several seminaries have been closed. Students of the National
Seminary in Beijing were forced to sign a declaration of loyalty to the
Independent Church, promising also to concelebrate with illegitimate bishops
(otherwise they would not receive a diploma at the end of their studies). The
Government is continuously strengthening a church that now objectively is already
separated from the universal Catholic Church; with enticements and threats they
induce the clergy to perform acts contrary to the doctrine and discipline of
the Church, denying their conscience and their dignity.
B.
In the latter half of 2015, there were some promising events
which however failed to live up to expectations. Bishop Wu Qin-jing of Zhouzhi,
ten years after his episcopal ordination, was finally installed as bishop, but
has yet to pay the price of a compromise (see my blog of 14 July 2015).
Shortly after, Bishop Zhang Yinlin Anyang was ordained. Even
some usually cautious Catholic media rejoiced saying that everything had gone
well. They pointed out that this ordination is the first after the last three
years of contacts between Rome and Beijing, and also the first in Pope Francis’
pontificate, presenting the event as a good start.
It is this last statement that scares me, because the
process included a "democratic election", the reading of a
"decree of appointment by the (so-called) Episcopal Conference of
China" and the canonically un-clear position of a consecrating bishop . A
similarly abnormal process took place three years ago, does it deserve our
rejoicing? (See my blog of 7 September 2015).
C.
In October comes the big news: A Vatican delegation was in
Beijing, there was a meeting. The Holy See gave no news of it. Father
Heyndrickx Jeroom broke the news (of course he knows everything). He says:
"They did not discuss sensitive issues like Bishop Su Zhimin of Baoding
still in detention, or such as Bishop Ma Daqin of Shanghai to house arrest for
more than three years (but these problems should be resolved before any
negotiations? Otherwise Obviously there is goodwill on the part of Beijing).
They focused on the issue of appointing bishops (of which model? Like with
Anyang?). After the meeting, the delegation paid a visit to Bishop Li Shan of
Beijing and the National Seminary where they met with Ma Ying Lin (Father
Heyndrickx said that these are signs of goodwill on the part of Beijing, I
think instead that they were acts of homage imposed by Beijing)".
Later the Vatican Secretary of State also confirmed that
there was a meeting and that it was "very positive" and this
"would be part of a process that will hopefully end with an agreement."
Pressed by some journalists as to whether there was real progress, Cardinal
Parolin responded: "The fact that we speak is already positive." It
seems that there is no agreement in sight as of yet.
D.
So what is the formula now under discussion for the
appointment of bishops? As an old Cardinal out on the peripheries, I have no
way of knowing, let alone guessing.
A recent article "A winter of darkness for religions in
China" by Bernardo Cervellera on AsiaNews, says: "From information
that has arrived from China it would seem that Beijing’s proposal is limited to
complete recognition by the Holy See for all official bishops (even
illegitimate and excommunicated bishops), without any mention of the unofficial
bishops and those in prison; Vatican approval of the government recognized
Council of Bishops, which excludes underground bishops; approval of the
competency of this Council (and not the Pope) in the appointment of new
candidates to the episcopacy who will be "democratically" elected (in
short according to the suggestions of the Patriotic Association). The Holy See
must approve the Council’s appointment and has a weak veto only in
"severe" cases, which must be justified if used. If the Holy See’s
justifications are considered "insufficient", the Council of Bishops
may decide to proceed anyway".
If this information is accurate, can the Holy See accept the
claims of the Chinese counterpart? Does this approach still respect the true
authority of the Pope to appoint bishops? Can the Pope can sign such an agreement?
(Pope Benedict said: "The authority of the Pope to appoint bishops is
given to the church by its founder Jesus Christ, it is not the property of the
Pope, neither can the Pope give it to others").
Do our officials in Rome know what an election is in China?
Do they know that the so-called Episcopal Conference is not only illegitimate,
but simply does not exist? What exists is an organism that is called "One
Association and One Conference", namely the Patriotic Association and the
Bishops' Conference always work together as one body, which is always chaired
by government officials (there are pictures to prove it, the Government does
not even try more to keep up appearances, it starkly flaunts the fact that they
now manage religion!). Signing such an agreement means the authority to appoint
bishops delivering into the hands of an atheist government.
This scheme is often compared to a (poorly defined) Model
Vietnamese, but it is much worse. The Vietnamese model is based on an
initiative that began with the Church in Vietnam, the true Catholic Church in
Vietnam. In China on the other hand, the so-called Association and Conference
hide the reality that it is the Government calling the shots.
Even in Eastern Europe of the past, such as in Poland and
Czechoslovakia, it was the Church that took the initiative and then gave the
Government veto power. In doing so, even if the government vetos a proposal for
the hundredth time, it is still the Church that presents a candidate and makes
the appointment. If the Government insists on a veto, it will only prolong the
impasse, and it will still allow the Church time to look for a suitable
candidate. But it is unthinkable to leave the initial proposal in the hands of
an atheist Government who cannot possible judge the suitability of a candidate
to be a bishop. Obviously, if the Church gives in to pressure from the
government, the only result – despite proclamations to the contrary – is that
it will have sold out the pontifical right to appoint bishops. Can this happen?
According to an article written by a certain András Fejerdy: "For pastoral
reasons - that is, because the full administration of the sacraments requires
completely consecrated bishops - the Holy See believed that the completion of
the Hungarian Bishops' Conference was so urgent that it accepted a solution
that formally did not upset the canonical principle of free appointment, but
that in practice gave the regime a decisive influence in choosing the
candidates”.
UCAN News reports recent news from Chengdu (Sichuan):
"Shortly after the visit of the Vatican delegation to Beijing, the Holy
See approved the episcopal candidate elected in May 2014". Is this also a
case of "not upsetting the canonical principle of free appointment, but
…in practice giving the regime a decisive influence in choosing the candidates
"?
E.
It is said that dialogue focused on the issue of the
appointment of bishops, but there are many other pending problems, when and how
will they be resolved?
The aforementioned AsiaNews article stated, again based on
information received from China: "Beijing (demands) the Holy See’s
recognition of all the official bishops, even the illegitimate and
excommunicated ones." I wonder: is it only the government that makes these
demands, without repentance of those concerned? Will the excommunicated only be
released from excommunication or even recognized as bishops? Even without any
act of repentance? Has the mercy of God come to this? Will the faithful be
obliged to obey these bishops?
So much remains to be resolved.
Illegitimate bishops who have been excommunicated have
abused the sacramental power (including ordination of deacons and priests) and
judicial (assigning offices) and the Holy See seems to be without rebuke for
them.
Legitimate bishops who participated in illegitimate
episcopal ordinations, one, two, even three, four times, without ever having
asked for forgiveness, or having received forgiveness from the Holy Father.
Also those who took part in the so-called Assembly of Representatives of
Chinese Catholics (the clearest symbol of a schismatic church).
Shortly after the Vatican delegation’s journey to Beijing
began, the government organized a large gathering of Church leaders, forcing on
that occasion a celebration of all the bishops, legitimate, illegitimate and
excommunicated. These are all objectively schismatic acts. The government now
can string along a large number of bishops, resulting in an irrecoverable loss
of dignity. If the Holy See signed some agreement with the Government without
clarifying all these things, it will cause a severe wound to the conscience of
the faithful.
F.
Obviously our underground communities are non-existent for
the Government. But now is even the Vatican ignoring them in negotiations, to
appease their Chinese counterparts? To "save the day" will we abandon
our brothers and sisters? But they are the healthy limbs of the Church! (Of
course, they too have their problems, especially when dioceses remain without
bishops, which can only lead to disorder). Is silencing the underground
community to please the government not a form of suicide?
In the recent negotiations there has been no mention of the
case of Msgr. James Su Zhimin in prison for 20 years. Nor of Msgr. Thaddeus Ma
Daqin of Shanghai under house arrest for more than three years because these
issues have been deemed "too sensitive"!?
In early September, some of the Shanghai faithful who were
in prison for a long time, along with their relatives, went on a pilgrimage to
Rome to commemorate the sixtieth anniversary of the outbreak of the great
persecution on September 8, 1955. The understanding was: "Do not make any
noise, the past is past, we have to look forward"!?
On a diplomatic level, the underground communities are the
ace in the Holy See’s deck; if we amputate these limbs, what have we left in
diplomatic standings to induce the other party to agree to our terms? By now,
the government controls nearly all the official communities, while the
underground communities are kept at bay by the Holy See. What do they still
need so come to terms? They only need the signature of the Holy Father, a
blessing, for this "Chinese Church." Beijing has no intention of
negotiating, only making demands. After such a signature they will oblige the
faithful of the underground community to come out and surrender to those who
were illegitimate bishops for a long time, maybe even excommunicated, but now,
with a clean slate, without even showing any repentance, leaning only on the Government
for their legitimacy, have become bishops in their own right.
G.
What makes me restless is the sight of our Eminent Secretary
of State still intoxicated by the miracles of Ostpolitik. In a speech last
year, at a Memorial for Card. Casaroli, he praised the success of its
predecessor in having secured the existence of the Church hierarchy in the
communist countries of Eastern Europe. He says: "In choosing candidates
for the episcopate, we choose shepherds and not people who systematically
oppose the regime, people who behave like gladiators, people who love to grandstand
on the political stage." I wonder: Who had he in mind while making this
description? I fear that he was thinking of a Cardinal Wyszynski, a Cardinal
Mindszenty, a Cardinal Beran. But these are the heroes who bravely defended the
faith of their people! It terrifies me to think this way and I sincerely hope
that I am wrong.
On the day that an agreement is signed with China there will
be peace and joy, but do not expect me to participate in the celebrations of
the beginning of this new Church. I disappear, I will start a monastic life to
pray and do penance. I will ask the forgiveness of Pope Benedict for not being
able to do what he was hoping that I could I do. I will ask Pope Francis to
forgive this old Cardinal from the peripheries for disturbing him with so many
inappropriate letters.
The innocent children were killed, the angel told Joseph to
take Mary and the Child and flee to safety. But today would our diplomats
advise Joseph to go and humbly beg for dialogue with Herod!?
P.S.
Please let it not be said that I believe the only line is
that of either or, of “official or unofficial”. The vast majority of the clergy
and lay people who belong to the official community are faithful to the
authority of the Holy Father. Many are suffering enormously because of the
abnormal situation of their Church, they are saddened by the weakness or lack
of rectitude of their pastors, sometimes they even try to prevent them from
falling further. In many cases a united clergy and a faithful people can defend
their pastor from further bullying from the Authorities.
© Asia News
