[Catholic Caucus] China Violates the Accord. A Bishop Rebels

L'Espresso ^ | July 3, 2019 | Sandro Magister

[ebb tide]

[Catholic Caucus] China Violates the Accord. A Bishop Rebels

There is important news in the “Guidelines” that the Holy See gave on June 28 to the Chinese bishops and priests on the obligation to sign a record of civil registration, “on pain of inability to function pastorally.”

The news lifts the veil on a key point of the “Provisional accord,” still secret, on the appointment of bishops, signed by the Holy See and Beijing last September 22.

We now know in fact from the “Guidelines” that in this accord communist China has for the first time “recognised the particular role of the Successor of Peter.” From which it follows that the “independence” of the Chinese Catholic Church from every foreign power, an element that is still indispensable for the Beijing authorities, must no longer be understood “in an absolute sense, namely as separation from the Pope and the Universal Church,” but in a sense “relative to the political sphere.”

The facts, however - as we also know from the “Guidelines” - do not correspond to this understanding at all, because “almost always” priests and bishops are still required to sign documents in which “the principle of independence, autonomy and self-administration of the Church in China” is reiterated in absolute terms, “notwithstanding the commitment assumed by the Chinese authorities to respect also Catholic doctrine.”

This is the reason why in the 2007 letter to Chinese Catholics - still the “magna carta” of the Catholic Church in China - Benedict XVI called “incompatible with Catholic doctrine” the founding principles of the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association, the regime’s organ of supervision, which anyone who wanted to come out from underground was required to join.

Now, however, for the Holy See enrollment in the Patriotic Association - or in an equivalent - is no longer to be absolutely ruled out, as long as it is accompanied by a concomitant attestation of observance of Catholic doctrine, made in writing or “even only verbally, if possible in the presence of a witness,” and in any case informing the pertinent bishop of the “intention” with which the record has been signed.

To judge, therefore, by these same “Guidelines,” relations between the Holy See and China continue to be very difficult. In spite of the fact that Rome is doing everything it can to smooth over or get around the disagreements, the reality of the facts continues to be “almost always” to the detriment of the Chinese Catholics. To the point that observers of proven expertise like Fathers Sergio Ticozzi and Bernardo Cervellera of the Pontifical Institute for Foreign Missions have not hesitated to call “a bit theoretical and optimistic” the step forward Rome has taken with the publication of the “Guidelines,” and to denounce as entirely out of place the applause lavished on June 19 by the “Global Times” - an official English-language organ of the communist party - on three “firsts” of the Vatican in Beijing, as if they were proof of a magnificent agreement: an exhibit of the Vatican Museums, an enthusiastic conference “on Pope Francis and his vision” by the Jesuit Bernard Vermander, and another overoptimistic conference on relations between China and the Holy See by Father Antonio Spadaro, director of “La Civiltà Cattolica” and a close associate of Pope Francis, reprinted on June 27 in “L’Osservatore Romano.”

*

If one then wants to get into the thick of things, two emblematic cases can be cited.

The first is a document published in its entirety on June 25 by “Asia News.” It comes from Fujian and is entitled “Letter of commitment for those responsible for places of worship and for consecrated persons.” Signing it is obligatory in order to exercise the ministry of parish priest, on pain of being driven back underground. And the same goes for consecrated persons, the nuns.

Among the requirements imposed by this document are those of “prohibiting minors from entering the church” and  “not organizing courses of formation for minors,” therefore not even catechism for children on parish premises.

There is also the requirement to break off all relations with confreres of the Catholic faith abroad, and to decline invitations to conferences or interviews. While even in their own homes they are not allowed to display sacred images, sing hymns, or post comments of a religious nature online.

Similar documents are in use in Henan, Hubei, Zhejiang.

*

The second case is that of the diocese of Mindong, also in Fujian, and of its two bishops.

Until 2018 the only bishop recognized by Rome - but not by Beijing - was Vincent Guo Xijin, under constant harassment by the Chinese authorities, which instead had installed in the same diocese in 2000 the excommunicated Vincent Zhan Silu, a man of the regime, vice-president of both the Patriotic Association and the pseudo episcopal conference that assembles only the bishops appointed by the government, in addition to being a member of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference.

But when on September 22 2018 Rome and Beijing signed the aforementioned accord, Pope Francis released Zhan from excommunication, assigned him the government of the diocese, and demoted Guo as his auxiliary bishop.

Guo, however, is not likewise to be acknowledged as bishop by the Chinese authorities until he should put his signature to a document that demands from him not only obedience to the new titular bishop, but above all submission to the laws of the country and adherence to the principles of “independence” and to the Patriotic Association.

Guo resists. He recognizes obedience to the bishop and submission to the laws. But he refuses to adhere to the principles of “independence” and to the Patriotic Association. The Chinese authorities allow him to publicly celebrate the rites of Holy Week, forbidden to him until just a few days before, but they do not want it to become known what he has signed and what he has not. On the contrary, they publicize his adherence to the Patriotic Association in order to induce the priests of the diocese to do the same.

Guo then rebels. In order to lay claim to freedom for himself and for his priests, he sends the authorities a letter in which he writes:

“The government has decided to persecute priests who refuse to sign adherence to the Patriotic Association. If I am not capable of protecting them, it is not worth it for me to be recognized as auxiliary bishop. I am ready to face persecution together with the other priests.”

The retaliation is immediate. The government authorities block Guo from presiding on June 28 over the rite of religious profession for a few nuns of the Sacred Heart. And he reacts by not participating, the following day, in the dedication Mass for the new cathedral of Mindong, built with government money.

He explains his action in a brief letter to the priests of the diocese, published in its entirety by “Asia News,” in which he writes:

“I have decided not to go to the ceremony even if they come to get me with a gurney. I am a man and not a monkey that performs however someone else wants. I had thought of not saying anything, but some brothers told me that everyone has the right to know the truth.”

And Mindong was the diocese that for the fans of the accord between Rome and Beijing was to be the “pilot project” for the new Chinese Church…

[ebb tide]

Ping