New underground 'bishops' in China
a problem for the Vatican
They're considered radical even in their own community
October 19, 2016
HONGKONG - The Holy See is facing a new challenge in China with at least two new "bishops" being "ordained" without papal — or even government — approval, just as it is trying to resolve the issue of bishop appointments by striking an unprecedented deal with China's ruling Communist Party.
The new "bishops" come from the underground church community and are not recognized by either the Vatican or the Chinese state, unlike the existing
eight bishops in the mainland who were ordained without Vatican approval but with government backing — the source of the church's core frustration with Beijing.
Father Paul Dong Guanhua from Zhengding in northern Hebei province announced during Sunday Mass on May 22 that he had been secretly ordained as a bishop 11 years ago, using rules which may or may not be permitted to be invoked — adding further to the fissure in the church in China.
He made public his "episcopal" status by wearing his mitre and holding his staff on Sept. 11, according to a source in Zhengding, a stronghold of the underground community counted among the province's 1 million Catholics.
Father Dong even posted his phone number on a popular Chinese Catholic website and on his blog recently calling for anyone wanting to become a bishop to approach him.
"I was ordained by an elderly bishop in 2005 but I will not tell you whom," Father Dong told ucanews.com.
Father Dong denied rumors that he has in turn ordained Father Wang Chengli, apostolic administrator of Heze in eastern Shandong province, or that there are five more self-styled bishops who do not have papal or government recognition.
But Father Dong did admit that he ordained a 51-year-old bishop on Sept. 7 this year. "It's dangerous to reveal who he is under government surveillance," he said.
These defiant bishops vowed to follow the path of the late Bishop Fan Xueyan of Baoding, also in Hebei, who strongly opposed the Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association (CPA) which is accused of controlling the church for the communist government.
Pope Benedict XVI's pastoral letter to Chinese Catholics in 2007 stated that the CPA is incompatible with church doctrine as its constitution advocates an independent church principle.
Bishop Julius Jia Zhiguo of Zhengding, who is approved by the Vatican but not recognized by the government, announced in a statement on Sept. 13 that Father Dong has incurred automatic excommunication under Canon Law Article 1382 for accepting episcopal consecration without papal approval.
Bishop Jia had previously suspended Father Dong’s priestly ministry some years ago, said the source in Zhengding.
However, Father Dong, with several hundred followers, claimed he was ordained under special faculties that the Holy See granted to the Chinese church in the 1980s, which gives power to bishops to ordain successors in times of persecution.
Pope Benedict's 2007 pastoral letter withdrew the special faculties but allowed individual dioceses to ask for new and updated faculties if particular situations so require.
Church sources close to the Vatican confirmed to ucanews.com that
Pope Francis intends to pardon the eight government-appointed bishops during the Year of Mercy as reported by Reuters on July 14. The Year of Mercy ends Nov. 20.
"The pope has been stressing mercy. If he pardons the government-backed bishops for the sake of negotiations, will he show the same mercy to these defiant underground bishops or excommunicate them?" said Father Joseph, an underground priest in Hebei.
There is concern about how the Vatican-unapproved bishops will affect the ongoing China-Vatican negotiations as the next round is due to take place late October.
The Holy See hopes Beijing will accept 30 underground bishops into the government-sanctioned bishops' conference when an accord is achieved.
"In the eyes of Beijing, it is just a number of illegal religious personnel be it 30 or 32," said Father Joseph. "The authorities will continue to detain or arrest us or remove us from the diocese if they think it's necessary."
The new self-styled "bishops" are considered radical even among the underground community, and their ordinations have sent shockwaves among Catholics across China after news spread Oct. 10.
On social media and Catholic websites, some Catholics, apparently coming from the open community with links to the CPA, mocked the "so-called loyalty" of the underground community and accused them of hurting the communion of the church.
Underground Catholics in general see the appointments as violating church law but they think it is time for the Holy See to review its China policy and be clear on its stance.
"The Vatican does not appoint bishops but only apostolic administrators for the underground community. It has adopted double standards or ignored irregular issues that could have been settled if it followed canon law," said Father Joseph from Hebei.
The Vatican excommunicated three government-backed bishops for the first time in 2011-2012 and pardoned or kept mute on the bishops who presided over the episcopal consecration. It stressed that such episcopal ordinations are canonically illegal but sacraments administered by the unapproved bishops are valid.
[As with the FSSPX.]
Meanwhile, AsiaNews has published a second protest to the inclusion of AsiaNews in the 'Bergoglio enemies list' published by Tornielli and Galeazzi in La Stampa.
On “Hong Kong sectors”
supposedly "against Francis"
by John Mok Chit Wai
October 19, 2016
HONGKONG (AsiaNews) – Recently, an Italian newspaper (with an online English version), has accused AsiaNews of providing space for "an alliance between Honk Kong circles, sectors within the US and Europe’s right-wing" to push Pope Francis to give priority to religious freedom over Church unity in China. The same article cites AsiaNews as among the Catholic groups and people "who are anti-Francis but love Putin."
Yesterday, we published AsiaNews’s response to these allegations. Today we received a response from John Mok, teaching assistant at the Chinese University of Hong Kong who has contributed two articles to AsiaNews on the issue of religious freedom in China and China-Vatican talks:
‘By courting Beijing, Pope Francis is losing China (as well as Hong Kong)’and
‘Xi Jinping and religions: the Party must lead “effectively” and “forcefully”’
As one of the contributors from Hong Kong who wrote articles for AsiaNews criticizing His Holiness Pope Francis’s diplomatic approach towards China, I was deeply perturbed by recent comments made by some Vatican experts.
The experts accused people from Hong Kong who criticized the current Sino-Vatican negotiations for having “political motivations that are masked by theological and ecclesial questions”, in order to defend “the West’s primacy”. And these people, dubbed as “Hong Kong circles” by the experts, are accused to have formed an alliance with “sectors within the US and Europe’s right-wing”. And all in all, these people are said to be “anti-Francis but love Putin”.
I am indeed a frequent critic of His Holiness over the Sino-Vatican negotiations. I submit articles not only to AsiaNews, but also to Chinese newspapers and online media based in Hong Kong, such as Ming Pao and Initium Media. (Though those experts in Vatican would not have a chance to read them, as I believe they cannot be bothered to read any material from the Chinese media.) But I do not understand many of the accusations directed against us.
All my criticisms are based on one principle: the protection of and the struggle for religious freedom. Religious freedom, I believe, is a basic human right. Though I am not an expert in the Church’s teachings, I do believe that most in the Church would share my judgment, including, of course, His Holiness.
I also believe that religious freedom is a universal value, but not, as many autocrats in Asia would claim, a Western concept that does not apply to Asian societies. If supporting Pope Francis’s call for the protection of Christians against severe persecution in the Middle East would render one his ally, then I do not understand why calling for the protection of Christians in China against terrible and violent oppressions by the Communist Party would make one become his enemy. I sincerely do not understand the logic behind this.
If the Church would like to spread her message in China freely and without the need to give up its full identity, and to unite the Catholics in China, religious freedom is the only guarantee. And if religious freedom is to be protected in China, then genuine political reform is the only way out.
Courting the Communist Party without any call for greater religious freedom, and without recognizing the Party’s growing grip on civil society under President Xi Jinping, would put many Chinese believers in helplessness and agony, and push the Church in China into further splits.
I am a teaching assistant working for a political science department in a local university. I help lead tutorials and discuss with my students about basic concepts in the field. Given my academic training, I cannot understand why criticizing His Holiness’s diplomatic tactics over China would necessarily make me into alliance with the right-wing, and even worse, with Vladimir Putin, the Russian autocrat.
According to my knowledge, both state capitalism and crony capitalism are classified as rightist ideologies, and the current Chinese government is practicing them. Under the Party’s policies, oligarchical corporations grow, workers and farmers are exploited, and property prices skyrocket because of unrestrained speculations.
If one believes that the current Chinese government is 'leftist' because it claims to be so [but mostly because communism has always been considered 'left'], then he is not seeing the real picture. And I do believe that His Holiness is equally concerned with Chinese workers who are suffering from exploitations by large corporations backed up by the Party.
I do support and laud His Holiness’ actions and teachings against reckless capitalist systems, political corruption, social inequalities, and human trafficking. But this does not make me a fan of Xi Jinping.
Putin is an autocrat who recklessly abuses human rights and suppresses dissidents. He shall be condemned. But so shall Xi! If one criticizes Putin for his iron-fist rule, then one should also condemn Xi for his heavy-handed rule! This, I believe, is called consistency and intellectual honesty.
All forms of autocratic rules shall be criticized and struggled against. This should be the common goal for all those who would like to make our world a better place. Yu Pedro Heping, a young priest from Ningxia Province who was found dead mysteriously, also asked the Holy See not to rush for results. Should we then, according to the Vatican experts, count him an ally of “sectors within the US and Europe’s right-wing”?
I am an advocate of Vatican II. I advocate the Church’s dialogue with all cultures, as well as localization. But this does not naturally make me a supporter of His Holiness’s China diplomacy. And according to Gaudium et Spes,
“Those who are suited or can become suited should prepare themselves for the difficult, but at the same time, the very noble art of politics, and should seek to practice this art without regard for their own interests or for material advantages. With integrity and wisdom, they must take action against any form of injustice and tyranny, against arbitrary domination by an individual or a political party and any intolerance. They should dedicate themselves to the service of all with sincerity and fairness, indeed, with the charity and fortitude demanded by political life.”
All Christians in China, indeed the people in China, are under the “arbitrary domination of… a political party”. Shouldn’t we heed the call from our great pastors to stand up and take action?
Reporters and journalists are responsible for, as His Holiness teaches us, spreading truth, instead of making baseless accusations and sowing the seeds for conflicts. If the Vatican experts would like to learn more about our judgments and opinions, I sincerely invite them to come to Hong Kong and engage in open discussions with us, including priests, believers, activists, and scholars. This, I believe, would be a good way to follow His Holiness’s example in trying to solve conflicts through dialogue.
[The young man is to be commended for his frequent evocation of what he can support in 'His Holiness's example', but let us all applaud him for opposing His HolinesS's China diplomacy of expedience.]
