Another Christendom Arises

Sandro Magister writes:

At the end of last week, almost at the same time, two prominent representatives of the Catholic Church, both Chinese, expressed two different judgments on the difficult moment which the Church is going through in China.

The first is Cardinal Joseph Zen Zekiun, former bishop of Hong Kong, now retired but still highly attentive to what is happening in his country. On Friday, April 1, Cardinal Zen published on "Asia News," the online agency of the Pontifical Institute for Foreign Missions, a vehement accusation against the "triumvirate" that allegedly wants to replicate with China the Ostpolitik practiced in the last century by the Vatican with the communist regimes. A policy of "dialogue at all costs" – Zen writes – disastrous then and even more disastrous now, whose sole result would be to plunge Chinese Catholics "deeper and deeper into the mire of slavish subjection."

The triumvirate accused by Zen is made up of Cardinal Ivan Dias, prefect of the congregation for the evangelization of peoples, by a "secretary" of the same Vatican congregation, and by Fr. Jerome Heyndrickx, a famous Sinologist and their strategist. The three are alleged to act – according to Zen – both against the stance dictated by Benedict XVI in his letter to the Church in China in 2007, and against the opinion of the overwhelming majority of the commission that the pope instituted to follow the Chinese situation, of which Zen is a member.

The second high Church official who on the same day, Friday, April 1, spoke out on the case of China is Archbishop Savio Hon Taifai, in an interview in the newspaper of the Italian episcopal conference, "Avvenire," conducted by the vaticanista Gianni Cardinale. Archbishop Hon, 61, is the first Chinese to hold high office in the Roman curia. Last December 23, Benedict XVI appointed him secretary of the congregation for the evangelization of peoples, which has jurisdiction over all mission territories, including China.

Originally from Hong Kong, tall and thin, jovial, Archbishop Hon calls himself a "hardly diplomatic theologian." In fact, in this interview, which is the first he has given so far, Hon expresses very direct views. Without dodging any of the questions. He even describes in simple terms the opposing views of Cardinal Zen and Fr. Heyndrickx. And he does not conceal that he is closer to the former, while not following him in everything. The interview with Hon is reproduced further below. But in order to put it into context, it is first necessary to summarize briefly what has happened in recent months between the Chinese government and the Catholic Church.

Last March 30 there was the ordination in China, in Jiangmen, of a new bishop: Paul Liang Jiansen, 46. His appointment was "approved" by the Holy See and at the same time "authorized" by the Chinese authorities. Between April 18 and November 15 of 2010, ten other bishops were ordained in China with the joint approval of Rome and Beijing, in the dioceses of Hohot, Haimen, Xiamen, Sanyuan, Taizhou, Yan'an, Taiyuan, Yuncheng, Nanchang, Zhoucun. In the midst of this, however, on November 15, there was an illicit ordination in the diocese of Chengde, performed at the behest of the government alone, without the pope's approval. No illicit episcopal ordination had been performed in China since 2006.

And shortly afterward, from December 6 to 8, the Chinese authorities gathered in Beijing a national assembly of Catholic representatives in which 45 bishops participated many of them approved by the Vatican, and the leaders of the episcopal conference and the patriotic association were elected: neither of which organizations is recognized by the Holy See. Both the illicit ordination in Chengde and the assembly in Beijing were condemned by the Holy See with very strongly worded statements, on November 24 and December 17.

So here is the Gianni Cardinale's interview with Archbishop Hon, taken from the April 1 issue of "Avvenire."

Q: Your Excellency, what were the reactions to your appointment, in your country?

A: Very positive in Hong Kong. I have received many congratulations also from communities and bishops of mainland China. They considered my appointment a true and proper Christmas present from the pope.

Q: And from the Chinese government and the official organisms of the Church?

A: No reaction. Maybe it's better that way, as is said in English: "no news, good news." They did not want to express any judgment: neither positive, nor negative. This seems to me an attitude of prudent restraint.

Q: You have traveled extensively in mainland China. When was the last time?

A: I was in Shanghai from last December 8 to 13. Precisely in conjunction with the eighth assembly of Chinese Catholic representatives that was held in Beijing from the 7th to the 9th of that month.

Q: What judgments did you take away in this regard?

A: The friends and students with whom I spoke were all very critical. It could be that some of them were favorable, but did not want to say so in front of me. I also spoke with those who had come back from Beijing. They also, with me, were critical. And they said that they had undergone enormous pressure to participate.

Q: On that occasion, the Holy See issued a very tough statement . . .

A: Yes. But I must say that not all of the participants had been forced to go. Some went spontaneously, just as they spontaneously adhere to the policy of the "autonomy" of the Chinese Church from the pope and from the Holy See.

Q: Even among the bishops?

A: Unfortunately even among the bishops, including those recognized by Rome. In Beijing not a few of them threw themselves at the new bishop of Chengde, consecrated illicitly a few weeks earlier, to congratulate him, to have photos taken with him, and this they were not obligated to do. In short: 45 bishops participated in this assembly, of an average age below 50. Some of them were taken there by force, others were not.

Q: And what conclusions do you draw from this observation?

A: That, unfortunately, the number of opportunists has grown.

Q: And what is the cause??
A: A lack of adequate formation in the clergy. But also some shortcomings in the selection of candidates for the episcopate. Sometimes the best have not been promoted, but compromise appointments have been preferred. For a few years now, in fact, Chinese officials have understood that the illegitimate bishops will never be truly accepted by the faithful, and so they prefer to work so that priests obedient to their guidelines may be consecrated bishops with the "placet" of the Holy See.

Q: So you maintain that a better formation of candidates to the priesthood is needed, and a more attentive discernment on the part of the Holy See in the selection of candidates to the episcopate. Does this mean that in recent years this has not always been the case?

A: This is not only an opinion of mine. Often in mainland China I have heard complaints from faithful and priests over compromise episcopal choices. But I must add that the Holy See has always, rightly, been concerned about avoiding illegitimate ordinations.

Q: And it is difficult to find the balance between this requirement and that of avoiding legitimate but compromise ordinations.

A: In effect that is the case. Selecting good candidates is difficult. The government maintains that in presenting lists of candidates that are acceptable from its point of view, it is already making a big concession. And if the Holy See refuses to give the "placet," then it threatens to have them consecrated anyway . . .

Q: As happened last November in Chengde.

A: Yes, for me that was a clear message, the government wanted to say: in my house I'm the boss. A signal that almost brought us back to the 1950's, as if some signs of dialogue that indeed have been registered had never been.

Q: How can this dialogue be resumed?

A: The Chinese government has officials who are very well prepared and capable in negotiating, and so must be the interlocutors on our side. But first of all, it must be understood if the government really wants to reach an agreement with the Holy See or not.

Q: On this, and on other things, there is a difference of opinion between two leading experts on China: Cardinal Joseph Zen and Fr. Jerome Heyndrickx. How do you see this debate?

A: Fr. Heyndrickx makes two premises. The first is that the Chinese government has good intentions, including that of signing an accord with the Holy See. The second is that after the pope's 2007 letter to Chinese Catholics, the so-called clandestine communities no longer have any reason to exist. On the other side, Cardinal Zen, who understands very well the Chinese reality and mentality, does not trust the communist authorities very much. He maintains, rightly, that if the government wants to secure this trust, it must carry out concrete actions that have not been seen so far. For example, giving the Church the freedom to choose its own bishops. Moreover, Cardinal Zen, and I with him, maintains that the clandestine communities still have reason to exist.

Q: One last question. Why has excommunication not been declared for the illicitly ordained bishops and their consecrators?

A: In reality, immediate excommunication is stipulated for those who receive and for those who carry out an illegitimate ordination. But there can be attenuating elements, for example for those who are forced to play a role in these actions. I believe that the Holy See, before declaring excommunication publicly, is investigating the individual cases to identify these attenuating circumstances. But this is understandably a delicate and long process.

Q: What is your judgment on illegitimate bishops?

A: There are cases of candidates who have themselves consecrated bishops illicitly with the idea that in a short span of time, at their pleading, the Holy See will grand pardon and full legitimacy. Care must be taken to oppose this kind of contriving. Having said this, however, it must always be kept in mind that the Church is the Body of Christ and that if there is a little piece of this Body that is breaking off, it must not be let go, but efforts must be made to recover it with justice but also with mercy.