+- The Catacombs (https://thecatacombs.org)
+-- Forum: Post Vatican II (https://thecatacombs.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+--- Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism (https://thecatacombs.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=23)
+---- Forum: Pope Francis (https://thecatacombs.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=113)
+---- Thread: The Sino-Vatican Pact fails again: an appeal from the Catholic Church in China (/showthread.php?tid=5198)
The Sino-Vatican Pact fails again: an appeal from the Catholic Church in China - Stone - 05-26-2023
The Sino-Vatican Pact fails again: an appeal from the Catholic Church in China
![[Image: GettyImages-1232098480-1024x708.jpg]](https://d8m8f5d6.stackpathcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/GettyImages-1232098480-1024x708.jpg)
The Catholic Herald | May 20, 2023
This has been written by a Chinese Catholic, to whom we have for obvious reasons granted anonymity.
The translation of Bishop Shen Bin from the Diocese of Haimen to the nearby diocese of Shanghai on 4th April 2023 marks the failure of the secret Sino-Vatican agreement of 2018. Diocesan priests in Shanghai are mostly reluctant to accept Bishop Shen Bin as the bishop of Shanghai, and it seems difficult for Bishop Shen to execute his governance such as transferring the priests among parishes.
The appointment was made, without the approval of the Apostolic See, by the so-called ‘Chinese Bishops’ Conference’, an institution controlled by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), of which Bishop Shen Bin is President. This is now the second time that the CCP has appointed a bishop without papal approval.
The first time was the illicit appointment, denounced by the Vatican, of Bishop John Peng Weizhao, the bishop of the Diocese of Yujiang in Jiangxi Province, as auxiliary bishop of the so-called ‘Diocese of Jiangxi’. (As well as controlling the appointment of bishops, the Chinese state has taken upon itself the
reorganisation of dioceses without reference to the Holy See.) Looking back over the five years since the agreement, it is difficult to discern its positive outcomes.
Up to 2018, there were ‘underground’ bishops who recognised the authority of the Pope, and a parallel structure of bishops and dioceses, the ‘Catholic Patriotic Association’ (CPA), which was in fact a branch of the Chinese State. The bishops of the CPA were, however, ordained validly, and in some cases made public or private declarations of loyalty to the Pope.
Perhaps surprisingly, CPA bishops and their priests are not necessarily shielded from persecution—the seizure of church buildings, for example, or arbitrary arrest—and large numbers of dioceses are deliberately left without bishops. No official Bishops’ Conference recognisable by the Vatican was possible, since by definition a Bishops’ Conference must have as its members all and only the legitimate bishops of a nation.
On the other hand, apart from Ad Apostolorum Principis of Pope Pius XII in 1958, the CPA has not been officially denounced as a schismatic entity by the Vatican, which over many years preferred to maintain a situation of ambiguity, in the hope that this would make some future rapprochement easier. In this confusing situation, lay Catholics generally felt able to attend services organised under the authority of both sets of bishops.
The 2018 agreement was intended to bring some order into this situation. First, to ensure that all the bishops of the CPA were consecrated with the necessary ‘pontifical mandate’ from the Vatican. Second, to fold the ‘underground’ Church into the CPA, so that there would be one, genuine, Catholic Church in China. Third, to create a stable ongoing situation with a level of Chinese state involvement acceptable to both sides. Its failure, however, can be summarised under three points.
1. The Holy See still lacks the final say on the appointment of bishops in China. Optimistic observers assumed that the unity of the Church in China would be served by bringing an end to episcopal ordinations without authorisation from the Holy See. What has in fact happened is that the CPA (or the Chinese Communist government, since they are the same thing) has paused episcopal ordinations that lack the proper mandate, but taken to translating bishops between dioceses without papal approval. This appears to be a way of getting round the ban on unauthorised episcopal ordinations. In seeing how this practice relates to the 2018 agreement, however, we cannot simply refer to the wording of the document, since this has never been publicly disclosed in full. It is true that episcopal ordinations now take place with pontifical mandate, but in practice this was already happening before the agreement was made, so does not represent a concession by the Chinese Communist Party. Actually, no matter before or after the agreement, in those CPA Episcopal ordinations with pontifical mandate, only the letter of appointment from the CPA is allowed to be read publicly, while the papal bull of appointment could only be read out privately in the sacristy beforehand.
2. There are still several excommunicated bishops in mainland China. According to the Canon Law, if an illicit episcopal consecration takes place, the consecrators and the ordinand(s) are excommunicated latae sententiae. This is an automatic penalty, happening immediately and without any declaration from the Holy See (Canon 1382). At one time there were many cases of episcopal ordination without pontifical mandate, and all the consecrators (including the co-consecrators) as well as the ordinands would have fallen foul of this canon. In 2018, Pope Francis lifted the excommunication from eight bishops (strangely, including a deceased bishop who had gone to his grave insisting on his independence from the Universal Church), who had been consecrated illicitly, but he did not do the same for the bishops who consecrated them. It is hard to know if this was an oversight or an attempt to pretend that no latae sententiae excommunication had taken place.
3. Legitimate bishops who cooperate with the agreement continue to be harassed. In 2018, with the execution of the agreement, two underground bishops, Peter Zhuang Jianjian of the Diocese of Swatow and Vincent Guo Xijin of the Diocese of Mindong, were asked to give up their positions. Aged 87 in 2018, Bishop Zhuang was asked to resign in order to give way to his counterpart, the CPA bishop Huang Bingzhang. By the time Bishop Zhuangwas brought to Beijing and told to resign by a ‘foreign prelate’, he felt very depressed and said he would rather be accused of disobedience than follow such an absurd demand. Nevertheless, in the end he accepted the demand from the Holy See and stepped aside. The case of Bishop Guo Xijin seems even more extraordinary. He was told by the Vatican to accept demotion to the position of an auxiliary bishop in his own diocese, while his CPA counterpart, Bishop Zhan Silu, was be recognised as the ordinary by the Holy See. At first Bishop Guo accepted this, as an order from the Pope. But in January 2020 he was driven out of the cathedral by the local authority by means of cutting out the water and electricity supply. At the same time, a notification was pasted on the wall saying that the building where Bishop Guo lived, built more than 10 years ago, was ‘not aligned to the fire laws and regulations’, hence must be closed immediately. Several of his priests were driven out from their parishes as well. Nine months later he announced his resignation.
These two cases have become widely known among Chinese Catholics, and it seems clear that the agreement has done nothing but encourage the Chinese state to encroach yet further on the liberty and rights of the Church. Instead of making concessions without any reciprocal move from China, it is high time the Vatican at least registered a protest. For the sake of the dignity of the Catholic Church, we urge that:
1. The Holy See declare that the translation of Bishop Shen Bin to be illicit and without effect.
2. The Holy See disclose the full content of the secret 2018 Sino-Vatican Agreement to the faithful throughout the world, especially those in China. They have the right to know such an important agreement concerning them.
3. The Holy See reconsider the renewal of the agreement with the CCP and adjust its diplomatic policy with a view to gaining some real concessions for the good of the Church.
There is an old Chinese saying that “A gentleman would rather die than be humiliated” (士可殺不可辱). Chinese Catholics don’t want endless concessions that only bring pain and suffering to the Church. Even at the cost of diplomatic embarrassment, we would prefer that the Vatican break its silence and respond to this illicit translation with courage and dignity, rather than turning a blind eye to it.