A corporal work of mercy.

A corporal work of mercy.
Click on photo for this corporal work of mercy!
Showing posts with label Cardinal Zen. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cardinal Zen. Show all posts

Wednesday 21 September 2022

Bergoglio and his henchmen abandon Cardinal Zen and the Wall Street Journal notices!

William McGurn of the Wall Street Journal has a personal connection to Cardinal Zen, Archbishop Emeritus of Hong Kong. It is shocking that it is the Wall Street Journal that declares how Bergoglio has left the Cardinal to rot in prison and facing an upcoming show trial with a Kangaroo communist court. The Ostpolitik of Montini is back with a vengeance. 

On March 27, 2017, we wrote here about what was going to happen to Chinese Catholics from our informed sources. 

Vox Cantoris: The Vatican sells out the real Catholics of China

God bless and strengthen Cardinal Zen as he carries his cross on behalf of Lao Baixing. May the Chinese Martyrs intercede before God. 






Friday 6 March 2020

Bergoglio Video to Chinese Catholics - be good little communists!

It was in early 2016 that this writer was amongst the first who wrote about the Vatican's plan to sell out the Catholics of China to the Communist regime. Everything written about has come to pass. Cardinal Zen's warnings have been ignored as has he. The Vatican apartchiks, most of them atheists, communists and sodomites, have turned on Cardinal Zen and now seek to discredit him.

The silly Pope Video which has for a few years now been a nauseating diatribe has sunk to new lows. Bergoglio can only be described as evil.

O God, save your Church in China. Save all of us from these evil men.


Wednesday 14 February 2018

Bergoglio and Parolin Despise the "Genuine Faith" of Those Who Defend the Church!

From the blog of Cardinal Zen translated by LifeSiteNews:



I still can’t understand understand what they are dialoguing with China over

by Cardinal Joseph Zen

Response to “Why we are in dialogue with China,” the interview His Eminence Cardinal Parolin granted to Gianni Valente (that is, the interview they cooked up together).

I have read the interview several times, and now I am reading it again (even though doing so disgusts me).

I am grateful to His Eminence for having acknowledged that “it is legitimate to have differing opinions.”

(1)

First of all, one notes the insistence with which His Eminence says that his point of view and the purpose of his activities are pastoral, spiritual, evangelical and faith-based nature, while our thinking and acting are only politically driven.

What we see instead is that he adores the Ostpolitik diplomacy of his teacher, [Agostino] Casaroli, and despises the genuine faith of those who firmly defend the Church, founded by Jesus on the Apostles, from any interference of secular power.

I cannot forget my astonishment in reading one of his addresses a few years ago in the Osservatore Romano, where he described the heroes of the faith in Central-European countries under the communist regime (Cardinal Wyszynsky, Cardinal Mindszenty and Cardinal Beran, though without naming them) ) as “gladiators,” and “people systematically opposed to the government and eager to appear on the political stage.”

(2)

One also notes the repeated mention of his compassion for the suffering of our brothers in China. Crocodile tears! What suffering is he talking about? He knows very well that they are not afraid of poverty, nor the limitation or deprivation of liberty, nor even the loss of life. But he doesn’t respect this at all (they are “gladiators”!)

He also speaks of wounds that are still open, and his intention to heal them with “the balm of mercy.” But what wounds is he talking about?

Towards the end of the interview, at a certain point he says: “With frankness, ... I will say: I am also convinced that some of the suffering experienced by the Church in China is due not so much to the will of individuals, as it is to the objective complexity of the situation.”

Therefore, he knows very well that, in the Church in China, it’s not (or rarely) a matter of personal offenses or resentments, but that they are all victims of persecution by an atheistic totalitarian power. Use the balm of mercy? But there are no personal offenses to forgive. It is a slavery from which they need to be liberated.

Mercy for the persecutors? For their accomplices? Reward traitors? Castigate the faithful? Force a legitimate bishop to surrender his post to an excommunicated one? Is this not rather rubbing salt in the wounds.

Let’s go back to the “objective situation.” The painful state wasn’t created by us, but by the regime. The communists want to enslave the Church. There are those who refuse this slavery, there are those who submit to it. Unfortunately, there are also those who embrace it.

Faced with this reality how is it possible not to speak of “power, resistance, clash, compromise, failure, surrender, and betrayal”?

Parolin wants us to talk about communion and collaboration. But are there conditions? Where do we unite? How do we collaborate? Let us analyze two fundamental matters that need to be clarified.

(3)

What is the nature of the unity we want to achieve?

    a) His Eminence praises Chinese Catholics and says that “there are not two Catholic Churches in China.” If I am not mistaken, I was the first one to say this at a meeting of the Synod of Bishops, given that, in both communities, the faithful are loyal to the Pope in their hearts (today with the increase of opportunists in the community run by the Government I no longer dare to apply the statement to the whole Church in China).

But Parolin cannot deny that, for the moment, there are two communities with two structures based on two different, opposing principles. One structure is founded on the principle of the Primacy of Peter, on which Jesus established his Church, while the other structure is imposed by an atheistic government intent on creating a schismatic Church that is subject to its power.

    b) Eliminating this division and reestablishing unity must be the desire of every Catholic, but not with a clean slate, let alone by manipulating the Pope Benedict’s Letter [to Chinese Catholics].

In the Pope Emeritus’s letter there is this paragraph (8.10): “Some [bishops], not wishing to be subjected to undue control exercised over the life of the Church, and eager to maintain total fidelity to the Successor of Peter and to Catholic doctrine, have felt themselves constrained to opt for clandestine consecration. The clandestine condition is not a normal feature of the Church’s life, and history shows that Pastors and faithful have recourse to it only amid suffering, in the desire to maintain the integrity of their faith and to resist interference from State agencies in matters pertaining intimately to the Church’s life.” Father Jeroom Heyndricks, quoting out of context the phrase “the clandestine condition is not a normal feature of the Church’s life,” took as his mission to spread the word throughout China (where he enjoyed great freedom of movement): “There is no longer any need for clandestine communities. Everyone must come out into the open, i.e. become part of the community subject to the Government.

In the Commission for the Church in China we noted this great error, but both the Secretariat of State and the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples have ignored this warning, obviously supporting the idea of ​​Father Heyndricks.

Only after two years, when this error had already done immense damage, did we manage insert into the “Compendium” booklet several notes that aim to distinguish a reconciliation of hearts from unity in the structures.

    c) Parolin says that one should not “maintain a perennial conflict between opposing principles and structures.” But obviously this does not depend on us alone, because one of the two structures is under the power of the Government, which certainly already controls it and gives no sign of giving it up.

Pope Benedict says that the journey toward unity “is not easy and cannot be accomplished overnight” (6.5, 6.6).

But our diplomats want to perform a miracle immediately and accuse others of “clinging to the spirit of opposition in order to condemn their brother,” of “using the past as a pretext to forge new resentments and closures,” and of “not being ready to forgive, which means that there are other interests to defend.”

How cruel are these reproaches addressed to faithful members of the Church, who for many long years have suffered every kind of deprivation and oppression for their fidelity to the true Church!

When the other party has no intention of respecting the essential nature of the Catholic Church and, on our side, they want to achieve unification at all costs, there is only one possible choice, that of forcing everyone to enter the “cage.”

    d) With the solution of the “enlarged cage” will we walk together? Will it be a new path? With serenity? With confidence?

They say it will be a gradual process, but suppose the planners already have in mind what the next step after the legitimizing of the illegitimate will be.

What will become of the legitimate Bishops according to the law of the Church but not recognized by the Government? Will they be “accepted”? That is, also admitted to the cage? Will there finally be “one” legitimate episcopal conference? (With the Government holding the key to the cage?)

Parolin and company recognize that this solution is not perfect, it is a lesser evil. Once can endure and suffer an evil (harm), but you can never do wrong (sin), however great or small it might be.

Suffering as others create a schismatic Church may be inevitable, but we cannot help in its creation.

Furthermore, there is no reason to fear a schismatic church created by the party. It will fade with the collapse of the regime. But a schismatic church with the Pope’s blessing will be horrible!

(4)

Having clarified the nature of the unity to be reached, it is easy to consider the following problem: How do we achieve this unity?

Through reconciliation (ad intra) and dialogue (with the Government).

    a) Reconciliation is not without difficulty but it is possible, because it depends only on our goodwill. Dialogue with the Government is more difficult.

    b) Pope Francis had said in Seoul: “The first condition of a dialogue is consistency with one’s own identity.”

It is a matter of honesty, of justice. We need to know and make known where we want to arrive, that is, according to our conscience what a good outcome of the dialogue will be. In our case, it is obviously: “a true religious freedom which not only does not harm but fosters the true good of the nation.”

Will we succeed in this dialogue? Is there a hope of success? Is there even a minimum foundation in the present situation, when the Chinese Communist Party is more powerful and dominating than ever? When both his actions and pronouncements are directed toward a more rigorous control over every religion, but in a special way of the so-called “foreign” religions.

The Communists no longer even feel the need to keep up appearances. Photographs show that it is the State that manages the Catholic Church in China, which is no longer Catholic but Chinese, schismatic. (It is a government official who presides over the [always] joint meeting of the Patriotic Association and the so-called “episcopal conference”). The Popes refrain from using the word “schism” out of compassion for those who find themselves there not of their own volition but under severe pressure.

From what we see, the Holy See is accepting this unacceptable reality. (Is it sure it is doing good to the Church?)

For dialogue to be true, it must start with a position of equality. There is no real dialogue between the jailer and the prisoners, between the victor and the vanquished. But our side seems to begin from a position of weakness. Reliable sources say that the Vatican Delegation could not discuss the case of Bishop Giacomo Su Zhi Min, who has been in the hands of the government for more than twenty years, because they refused to discuss it. It seems to me that our side should have left the negotiating table and come home. Accepting their refusal is like kneeling from the start.

After all, we are not the vanquished. Do our diplomats not know that the faithful of the clandestine community constituted, and perhaps still constitute, the majority? That in various places they have churches and cathedrals? That in the city, where obviously they cannot have churches, they have Masses said in private houses and are undisturbed by the public security authorities who are also aware of everything. Unfortunately, as of February 2018, we can expect a much stricter control by the Government on the activities of our brothers and sisters, also because the Government knows that it now has the Holy See’s consent.

(c) While supporting the need for external dialogue with the government, the Vatican has stifled dialogue within the Church. With a supremely ill-mannered gesture, and without a word, it liquidated the Pontifical Commission for the Church in China established Pope Benedict. They got rid of the only competent Chinese voice in the Vatican, Archbishop Savio, by sending him as nuncio to Greece. “Finding syntheses of truth” indeed!“Discovering God’s plan together” indeed! They are sure they “have considered everything adequately.”

(5)

The most repugnant thing I find in the whole interview is the dishonest exploitation of phrases in the Letter of Pope Benedict, making it appear that he was a faithful supporter of the Pope Emeritus, whereas in reality he and the then Prefect of the Congregation for the Evangelization of the Peoples thwarted all of Pope Ratzinger’s efforts to bring the Church in China back to the right path.

At the beginning and end of the interview he cites two quotations, respectively.

    a) In Chapter 4, paragraph 7 Pope Benedict says: “The solution to existing problems cannot be pursued via an ongoing conflict with the legitimate civil authorities; at the same time, though, compliance with those authorities is not acceptable when they interfere unduly in matters regarding the faith and discipline of the Church.”

    b) In Paragraph 6, he had said: (Citing Deus caritas est) “The Church cannot and must not take upon herself the political battle to bring about the most just society possible. She cannot and must not replace the State. Yet at the same time she cannot and must not remain on the sidelines in the fight for justice.”

In both quotes, Parolin took advantage of the first half, leaving out the other half, thus losing the balance of Pope Benedict’s thought.

(6)

Given the recent controversies, I cannot fail to clarify my relationship with Pope Francis who, whenever I meet him, fills me with tenderness.

It is true that my revelations of private conversations may have caused him embarrassment. I am sorry for this. But I am still convinced that there is a divide between His Holiness’ way of thinking and the way of thinking of his collaborators, who have a field day taking advantage of the Pope’s optimism to pursue their goals. Until proven otherwise, I am convinced that I have defended the good name of the Pope from responsibility for the erroneous things coming from his collaborators, and of having communicated his encouragement to my brothers and sisters in China who are, as we say in China, “in the burning fire and in deep waters.”

If one day it should happen that a bad agreement is signed with China, obviously with the approval of the Pope, I will withdraw in silence to a “monastic life.” Certainly as a son, even though unworthy, of Don Bosco, I will not make myself the head of a rebellion against the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ on earth.

Let us pray for Pope Francis “that the Lord may preserve him, give him strength, make him happy, and save him from the hands of his enemies.”

Translation by Diane Montagna

Friday 2 February 2018

Cardinal Zen: ":Do I think that the Vatican is selling out the Catholic Church in China? Yes, definitely."

Cardinal Zen has issued another statement; 
So, do I think that the Vatican is selling out the Catholic Church in China? Yes, definitely, if they go in the direction which is obvious from all what they are doing in recent years and months.
If I were asked, whom do I believe, Cardinal Zen or the Pope and his Vatican apparatchiks, the answer is quite easy.

Image result for cardinal zen

From Cardinal Zen:


Some explanations may still be in order.

1. Please, notice that the problem is not the resignation of the legitimate Bishops, but the request to make place for the illegitimate and even excommunicated ones. Many old underground Bishops, though the retirement age law has never been enforced in China, have insistently asked for a successor, but have never received any answer from the Holy See. Some others, who have a successor already named, may be even already in possession of the Bulla signed by the Holy Father, were ordered not to proceed with the ordination for fear of offending the Government.

2. I have talked mainly of the two cases of Shantou and Mindong. I do not have any other information except the copy of a letter written by an outstanding Catholic lady, a retired University professor well-acquainted with affairs of the Church in China, in which she warns Msgr. Celli against pushing for the legitimization of “bishop” Lei Shi Ying in Sichuan.

3. I acknowledge myself as a pessimist regarding the present situation of the Church in China, but my pessimism has a foundation in my long direct experience of the Church in China. From 1989 to 1996 I used to spend six months a year teaching in the various Seminaries of the official Catholic community. I had direct experience of the slavery and humiliation to which those our brother Bishops are subjected.

And from the recent information, there is no reason to change that pessimistic view. The Communist Government is making new harsher regulations limiting religious freedom. They are now strictly enforcing regulations which up to now were practically only on paper (from the 1st of February 2018 attendance to Mass in the underground will no longer be tolerated).

4. Some say that all the efforts to reach an agreement is to avoid the ecclesial schism. How ridiculous! The schism is there, in the Independent Church! The Popes avoided using the word “schism” because they knew that many in the official Catholic community were there not by their own free will, but under heavy pressure. The proposed “unification” would force everybody into that community. The Vatican would be giving the blessing on the new strengthened schismatic Church, taking away the bad conscience from all those who are already willing renegades and those others who would readily join them.

5. Is it not good to try to find mutual ground to bridge the decades-long divide between the Vatican and China? But can there be anything really “mutual” with a totalitarian regime? Either you surrender or you accept persecution, but remaining faithful to yourself (can you imagine an agreement between St. Joseph and King Herod?)

6. So, do I think that the Vatican is selling out the Catholic Church in China? Yes, definitely, if they go in the direction which is obvious from all what they are doing in recent years and months.

7. Some expert on the Catholic Church in China is saying that it is not logical to suppose a harsher religious policy from Xi Jinping. However, we are not talking about logical thinking, but the obvious and crude reality.


8. Am I the major obstacle in the process of reaching a deal between the Vatican and China? If that is a bad deal, I would be more than happy to be the obstacle.

Wednesday 31 January 2018

Cardinal Parolin was interviewed on the China matter.

Cardinal Parolin was interviewed on the China matter.

He states:

"There is no longer reason to prevent Chinese Catholics from living in communion together."

It cannot be accepted anywhere that the State has a veto over the Church's selections of its bishops. The official Catholic Patriotic Association, a schsimatic excommunicated "church" with apostolic succession and under the appearance of being Catholic is a communist entity. It must support the government's policy including its policy on abortion and the restriction of family size. For 70 years the real Catholics of China have been persecuted and martyred.

This is a betrayal of them. 

There can be no deal with the communist dragon, the devil. 

Make no mistake - the Vatican apparatchiks and Peronists are running scared because they have been exposed.




Parolin, “Why we are in dialogue with China”
Interview with the Secretary of State who responds to the accusations made against the Holy See regarding the ongoing contacts, “We trust that the Chinese faithful, thanks to their spirit of faith, will know how to recognize that our action is animated by trust in the Lord and does not answer to worldly logic” 

Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Vatican Secretary of State

VATICAN CITY --  Several signals (including opaque operations, actual political manipulations, and even sabotage) indicate that important developments may occur in contacts between the Holy See and the Government of the People's Republic of China. The time is right to listen to an authoritative word, which will help to grasp what the Pope and the Holy See really have at heart. And with our Chinese brothers and sisters in mind, help to dispel suspicions and artificial fumes, to look at the ecclesial heart of the whole question, outside politicized narratives. For this reason, Vatican Insider interviewed Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Secretary of State of His Holiness. 
 
Eminence, what can you tell us about the dialogue between the Holy See and the People's Republic of China?

"As it is well known, with the advent of "New China", there were, for the life of the Church in that great country, moments of serious contrasts and severe suffering. Since the eighties, however, contacts have been established between representatives of the Holy See and of People's China, who have known different seasons and alternating events. The Holy See has always maintained a pastoral approach, trying to overcome the contrasts and making itself available for a respectful and constructive dialogue with the civil authorities. Pope Benedict XVI well represented the spirit of this dialogue in his 2007 Letter to Chinese Catholics, "the solution to existing problems cannot be pursued via an ongoing conflict with the legitimate civil authorities " (n. 4). In Pope Francis’ pontificate, the ongoing negotiations move exactly along these lines: constructive openness to dialogue and fidelity to the genuine Tradition of the Church".

What are the concrete expectations of the Holy See from this dialogue?

"First of all, I would like to make a premise: in China, perhaps more than elsewhere, Catholics have been able to preserve, despite the many difficulties and sufferings, the authentic deposit of faith, keeping firmly the bond of hierarchical communion between the Bishops and the Successor of Peter, as a visible guarantee of faith itself. In fact, communion between the Bishop of Rome and all Catholic Bishops touches the heart of the Church's unity: it is not a private matter between the Pope and the Chinese Bishops or between the Apostolic See and civil authorities. Having said that, the main purpose of the Holy See in the ongoing dialogue is precisely that of safeguarding communion within the Church, in the wake of genuine Tradition and constant ecclesiastical discipline. You see, in China there are not two Churches, but two communities of faithful called to follow a gradual path of reconciliation towards unity. It is not, therefore, a matter of maintaining a perennial conflict between opposing principles and structures, but of finding realistic pastoral solutions that allow Catholics to live their faith and to continue together the work of evangelization in the specific Chinese context".

The communion of which you have spoken calls into question the delicate issue of the episcopal appointments, which are stirring up much controversy. Will a potential agreement on this issue succeed in resolving the problems of the Church in China in a fair manner? 

"The Holy See knows and shares the serious sufferings endured by many Catholics in China and their generous witness to the Gospel. She knows that there are many problems for the life of the Church and that they cannot all be solved together. But, in this context, the question of the appointment of Bishops is crucial. On the other hand, we cannot forget that the freedom of the Church and the appointment of Bishops have always been recurring themes in the relations between the Holy See and the States. Certainly, the path started with China through the current contacts is gradual and still exposed to many unforeseen events, as well as new possible emergencies. No one can say in conscience that they have perfect solutions for all problems. Time and patience are needed to heal the many personal wounds inflicted on each other within the communities. Unfortunately, it is certain that there will still be misunderstandings, fatigue and suffering to be faced. But we all have confidence that, once the issue of the Episcopal appointments has been adequately considered, the remaining difficulties should no longer be such as to prevent Chinese Catholics from living in communion with each other and with the Pope. This is the important thing, so long-awaited and desired already by Saint John Paul II and Benedict XVI and today pursued with far-sightedness by Pope Francis".

What is then the true attitude of the Holy See towards Chinese authorities?

"It is important to reiterate this: in dialogue with China, the Holy See pursues a spiritual aim: to be and feel fully Catholic and, at the same time, authentically Chinese. With honesty and realism, the Church asks nothing but to profess her faith with more serenity, definitively ending a long period of contrasts, in order to give more room for greater trust and offer the positive contribution of Catholics to the good of Chinese society as a whole. 

Of course, many wounds are still open today. To treat them, we need to use the balm of mercy. And if someone is asked to make a sacrifice, small or great, it must be clear to everyone that this is not the price of a political exchange, but falls within the evangelical perspective of a greater good, the good of the Church of Christ. The hope is that, when God wills it, we won’t have to speak of "legitimate" and "illegitimate" Bishops, "clandestine" and "official" Bishops in the Church in China, but about meeting among brothers and sisters, learning the language of collaboration and communion again. Without this experience, how could the Church in China re-launch the journey of evangelization and bring to others the consolation of the Lord? If you are not ready to forgive, this means, unfortunately, that there are other interests to defend: but this is not an evangelical perspective". 

If this is the attitude, is there not the risk of erasing the past and present suffering by wiping the slate clean?

"Quite the contrary. Many Chinese Christians, when they celebrate their martyrs who have suffered unjust trials and persecutions, remember that they have been able to rely on God, even in their fragile humanity. Now, the best way to honor this testimony and make it fruitful in the present, is to entrust the present life of Catholic communities in China to the Lord Jesus. But this cannot be done in a spiritualistic and disembodied way. This is done by choosing fidelity to the Successor of Peter, with a spirit of filial obedience, even when not everything appears immediately clear and understandable. About your question, it is not a matter of wiping the slate clean, ignoring or, almost magically erasing the painful path of so many faithful and pastors, but of investing the human and spiritual capital of so many trials to build a more serene and fraternal future, with the help of God. The Spirit who has so far guarded the faith of Chinese Catholics is the same Spirit who supports them today on the new path they have embarked upon". 

 Is there a council, a particular request that the Apostolic See can address to the Chinese faithful at this moment? To those who are happy before potential new developments, but also to those who are confused or  have objections? 

"I would like to say with great simplicity and clarity that the Church will never forget the past and present trials and sufferings of Chinese Catholics. All this is a great treasure for the universal Church. Therefore, to the Chinese Catholics I say with great fraternity: we are close to you, not only through prayer, but also through our daily commitment to accompany and support you on the path of full communion. We ask you, therefore, that no one should cling to the spirit of opposition to condemn his brother or use the past as an excuse to stir up new resentments and closures. On the contrary, we hope that each one will look with confidence at the future of the Church, beyond any human limit". 

Your Eminence, do you really believe that this is possible? What is your trust based on? 

"I am convinced of one thing. Trust is not the result of the strength of diplomacy or negotiations. Trust is based on the Lord who guides history. We trust that the Chinese faithful, thanks to their sense of faith, will know how to recognize that the action of the Holy See is animated by this trust, which does not respond to worldly logics. It is especially up to the pastors to help the faithful to recognize in the Pope's guidance the sure reference point for grasping God's plan in the present circumstances". 

Is the Pope informed of what his collaborators do in their contacts with the Chinese government? 

"Yes, the Holy Father personally follows current contacts with the authorities of the People's Republic of China. All his collaborators act in concert with him. No one takes private initiatives. Frankly, any other kind of reasoning seems to me to be out of place."

In recent times, critical expressions have emerged, also within the Church, about the approach adopted by the Holy See in dialogue with the Chinese Authorities, judged by some as a true "surrender" for political reasons. What do you think? 

"I think, first of all, that in the Church there is a full right to disagree and to tell one's own criticisms, and that the Holy See has a moral duty to listen to them and to evaluate them carefully. I am also convinced that, among Christians, criticism should be directed at building communion and not at stirring up divisions. To be frank, I will tell you: I am also convinced that part of the suffering experienced by the Church in China is not so much due to the will of individuals as to the objective complexity of the situation. Therefore, it is legitimate to have different views over the most appropriate responses to the problems of the past and present. That is entirely reasonable. Having said that, I think that no personal point of view can be considered as an exclusive interpreter of what is good for Chinese Catholics. Therefore, the Holy See works to find a synthesis of truth and a practicable way to respond to the legitimate expectations of the faithful, inside and outside China. It takes greater humility and spirit of faith to discover together God's plan for the Church in China. It takes greater caution and moderation on the part of everyone in order not to fall into sterile polemics that hurt communion and rob our hope for a better future". 

What do you mean? 

"I mean that we are all called to distinguish more appropriately the spiritual and pastoral dimension from that of politics. Let us start, for example, with the words we use every day. Expressions such as power, betrayal, resistance, surrender, confrontation, failure, compromise, should make room for others, such as service, dialogue, mercy, forgiveness, reconciliation, collaboration, communion. If you are not prepared to change this approach, there is a serious problem: taht of thinking and acting only politically. In this regard, the Holy See hopes for everyone a sincere pastoral conversion inspired by the Gospel of mercy, in order to learn to welcome one another among brothers and sisters, as Pope Francis has often called for". 

What would you say to the Chinese leaders today?  

"Look, on this point I would like to refer again to Benedict XVI's words in his Letter to the Chinese Catholics. He teaches that the mission proper to the Church is not to change the structures or administration of the State, but to proclaim to mankind Christ, the Savior of the world, relying on the power of God. The Church in China does not want to replace the state, but wants to make a positive and serene contribution for the good of all. Therefore, the Holy See's message is a message of goodwill, with the hope of continuing the dialogue undertaken in order to contribute to the life of the Catholic Church in China, to the good of the Chinese people and to World peace".   

Tuesday 30 January 2018

Cardinal Zen on the Vatican plan to sell out the Church to China's communists

Image resultCardinal Zen releases below information about the situation in China, his visit to Rome and his meeting with Pope Francis.

He writes that the Pope told him that he did not want to see another Mindszenty case. (Card. Josef Mindszenty was the Archbishop of Budapest, Cardinal Primate of Hungary under Communist persecution. He suffered much in several years in prison. During the short-lived revolution of 1956, he was freed from prison by the insurgents and, before the Red Army crashed the revolution, took refuge in the American Embassy. Under the pressure of the Government he was ordered by the Holy See to leave his country and immediately a successor was named to the liking of the Communist Government).

I wrote recently that it is not what a man says but a what a man does which is important. 

The Pope says, he does not want to see more "Mindszenty" cases.

Time will tell.




Dear Friends in the Media

By Cardinal Zen

Monday, 29 January, 2018
Dear Friends in the Media,
Since AsiaNews has revealed some recent facts in the Church in mainland China, of legitimate bishops being asked by the “Holy See” to resign and make place for illegitimate, even explicitly excommunicated, “bishops”, many different versions of the facts and interpretations are creating confusion among the people. Many, knowing of my recent trip to Rome, are asking me for some clarification.
Back in October, when Bishop Zhuang received the first communication from the Holy See and asked me for help, I send someone to bring his letter to the Prefect of the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, with, enclosed, a copy for the Holy Father. I don’t know if that enclosed copy reached the desk of the Holy Father. Fortunately, Archbishop Savio Hon Tai Fai was still in Rome and could meet the Pope in a fare-well visit. In that occasion, he brought the two cases of Shantou and Mindong to the knowledge of the Holy Father. The Holy Father was surprised and promised to look into the matter.
Given the words of the Holy Father to Archbishop Savio Hon, the new facts in December were all the more a shocking surprise to me. When the old distressed Bishop Zhuang asked me to bring to the Holy Father his answer to the message conveyed to him by the “Vatican Delegation” in Beijing, I simply could not say “No”. But what could I do to make sure that his letter reach the Holy Father, while not even I can be sure that my own many letters did reach him.
To make sure that our voice reached the Holy Father, I took the sudden decision of going to Rome. I left Hong Kong the night of 9th January, arriving in Rome the early morning of 10th January, just in time (actually, a bit late) to join the Wednesday Public Audience. At the end of the audience, we Cardinals and Bishops are admitted to the “bacia mano” and I had the chance to put into the hands of the Holy Father the envelop, saying that I was coming to Rome for the only purpose of bringing to him a letter of Bishop Zhuang, hoping he can find time to read it (in the envelop there was the original letter of the Bishop in Chinese with my translation into Italian and a letter of mine).
For obvious reasons, I hoped my appearance at the audience would not be too much noticed, but my late arrival in the hall made it particularly noticeable. Anyway, now everybody can see the whole proceeding from the Vatican TV (by the way, the audience was held in Paul VI Hall, not in St. Peter’s Square and I was a little late to the audience, but did not have to “wait in a queue, in a cold weather”, as some media erroneously reported).
When in Rome, I met Fr. Bernard Cervellera of AsiaNews. We exchanged our information, but I told him not to write anything. He complied. Now that someone else broke the news, I can agree to confirm it. Yes, as far as I know, things happened just as they are related in AsiaNews (the AsiaNews report “believes” that the Bishop leading the Vatican Delegation was Msgr. Celli. I do not know in what official capacity he was there, but it is most likely that he was the one there in Beijing).
In this crucial moment and given the confusion in the media, I, knowing directly the situation of Shantou and indirectly that of Mindong, feel duty-bound to share my knowledge of the facts, so that the people sincerely concerned with the good of the Church may know the truth to which they are entitled. I am well aware that in doing so I may talk about things which, technically, are qualified as “confidential”. But my conscience tells me that in this case the “right to truth” should override any such “duty of confidentiality”.
With such conviction, I am going to share with you also the following:
In the afternoon of that day, 10th January, I received a phone-call from Santa Marta telling me that the Holy Father would receive me in private audience in the evening of Friday 12thJanuary (though the report appeared only on 14th January in the Holy See bulletin). That was the last day of my 85 years of life, what a gift from Heaven! (Note that it was the vigil of the Holy Father’s departure for Chile and Peru, so the Holy Father must have been very busy).
On that evening the conversation lasted about half an hour. I was rather disorderly in my talking, but I think I succeeded to convey to the Holy Father the worries of his faithful children in China.
The most important question I put to the Holy Father (which was also in the letter) was whether he had had time “to look into the matter” (as he promised Archbishop Savio Hon). In spite of the danger of being accused of breach of confidentiality, I decide to tell you what His Holiness said: “Yes, I told them (his collaborators in the Holy See) not to create another Mindszenty case”! I was there in the presence of the Holy Father representing my suffering brothers in China. His words should be rightly understood as of consolation and encouragement more for them than for me.
I think it was most meaningful and appropriate for the Holy Father to make this historical reference to Card. Josef Mindszenty, one of the heroes of our faith. (Card. Josef Mindszenty was the Archbishop of Budapest, Cardinal Primate of Hungary under Communist persecution. He suffered much in several years in prison. During the short-lived revolution of 1956, he was freed from prison by the insurgents and, before the Red Army crashed the revolution, took refuge in the American Embassy. Under the pressure of the Government he was ordered by the Holy See to leave his country and immediately a successor was named to the likings of the Communist Government).
With this revelation, I hope I have satisfied the legitimate “right to know” of the media and of my brothers in China.
The important thing for us now is to pray for the Holy Father, very fittingly by singing the traditional song “Oremus”:
Oremus pro Pontifice nostro Francisco, Dominus conservet eum et vivificet eum et beatum faciat eum in terra et non tradat eum in animam inimicorum eius.
————————————-
Some explanations may still be in order.
1. Please, notice that the problem is not the resignation of the legitimate Bishops, but the request to make place for the illegitimate and even excommunicated ones. Many old underground Bishops, though the retirement age law has never been enforced in China, have insistently asked for a successor, but have never received any answer from the Holy See. Some others, who have a successor already named, may be even already in possession of the Bulla signed by the Holy Father, were ordered not to proceed with the ordination for fear of offending the Government.
2. I have talked mainly of the two cases of Shantou and Mindong. I do not have any other information except the copy of a letter written by an outstanding Catholic lady, a retired University professor well-acquainted with affairs of the Church in China, in which she warns Msgr. Celli against pushing for the legitimization of “bishop” Lei Shi Ying in Sichuan.
3. I acknowledge myself as a pessimist regarding the present situation of the Church in China, but my pessimism has a foundation in my long direct experience of the Church in China. From 1989 to 1996 I used to spend six months a year teaching in the various Seminaries of the official Catholic community. I had direct experience of the slavery and humiliation to which those our brother Bishops are subjected.
And from the recent information, there is no reason to change that pessimistic view. The Communist Government is making new harsher regulations limiting religious freedom. They are now strictly enforcing regulations which up to now were practically only on paper (from the 1st of February 2018 attendance to Mass in the underground will no longer be tolerated).
4. Some say that all the efforts to reach an agreement is to avoid the ecclesial schism. How ridiculous! The schism is there, in the Independent Church! The Popes avoided using the word “schism” because they knew that many in the official Catholic community were there not by their own free will, but under heavy pressure. The proposed “unification” would force everybody into that community. The Vatican would be giving the blessing on the new strengthened schismatic Church, taking away the bad conscience from all those who are already willing renegades and those others who would readily join them.
5. Is it not good to try to find mutual ground to bridge the decades-long divide between the Vatican and China? But can there be anything really “mutual” with a totalitarian regime? Either you surrender or you accept persecution, but remaining faithful to yourself (can you imagine an agreement between St. Joseph and King Herod?)
6. So, do I think that the Vatican is selling out the Catholic Church in China? Yes, definitely, if they go in the direction which is obvious from all what they are doing in recent years and months.
7. Some expert on the Catholic Church in China is saying that it is not logical to suppose a harsher religious policy from Xi Jinping. However, we are not talking about logical thinking, but the obvious and crude reality.
8. Am I the major obstacle in the process of reaching a deal between the Vatican and China? If that is a bad deal, I would be more than happy to be the obstacle.

Wednesday 30 November 2016

Will Bergoglio betray Christ to appease the Dragon of Red China?

The issue of Far "Ostpolitik" too China has been covered by this writer previously. I have written no less than five times on this matter since the first post in March 2015. At that time, I was given information from a Vatican contact that indeed, Francis was opening the door to China and the result would be detrimental to the true Catholic Church in China, that which is underground, and to Catholics in Taiwan.

http://voxcantor.blogspot.ca/2015/03/is-sell-out-of-mindzenty-and-slipyj-for.html

The Red China government has become an absurd mix of communism and corporate fascism. It is not pure communism as thousands have become obscenely wealthy whilst others are still as poor as they have ever been. It is not pure communism but more a mix with some odd kind of Fascism where the State partners with corportions, there is no free market, there is no true religous freedom. The underground, persecuted Church in China, is the Catholic Church. The "legal" Church is schismatic as its bishops are appointed by the communist government. 

Remember, this is a government that for three decades has forced abortion on its people to ensure its one child policy, now "mercifully" upgraded to two, after which, the others will be deprived of life.


And the Vicar of Christ wants these communist devils do choose the Church's Shepherds?
Bergoglio has lost his mind. He clearly does not like Catholics. Who is it that this man serves?

The authority on China is the great Cardinal Zen, Emeritus Bishop of Hong Kong.

Once again, he lays out the facts.

Will Bergoglio take away Cardinal Zen's red hat too?



Image result for cardinal zen


Cardinal Zen: Pope Francis would ‘betray Christ’ by allowing Communist China to select bishops
HONG KONG, November 29, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) — The highest ranking Chinese Catholic has stated that if Pope Francis allows Communist China to have a hand in the selection of the nation's Catholic bishops it would be “betraying Jesus Christ.”
“You cannot go into negotiations with the mentality ‘we want to sign an agreement at any cost,’ then you are surrendering yourself, you are betraying yourself, you are betraying Jesus Christ,” Cardinal Joseph Zen told The Guardian this week.
The 84-year-old former bishop of Hong Kong has firmly opposed a potential deal between the Vatican and the Chinese government that would add legitimacy to the state-run Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association. He says the move would alienate authentic Catholics who worship in the ‘underground Church’ from the one true Church headed by Christ and his representative, the Pope.
The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this month that in such a deal, "Rome would commit to recognize as bishops only those clerics who first win nomination from the Patriotic Association’s bishops conference,” thus allowing the government, not the Church, to decide who is bishop.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pope-francis-would-betray-christ-in-allowing-communist-china-to-select-bish


Tuesday 16 August 2016

In Appointing Bishops, the Pope Leans Toward Beijing - sells out Chinese Catholics to the devil

More than once, I have written on the issue of the recognition of Communist China's Catholic Patriotic Association and the Vatican's recognition of this schismatic government church at the expense of China's real Catholics. Chinese Catholic bishops and laity alike have suffered decades of harassment, persecution, imprisonment and death at the hands of the communists. The government set up an "approved" church that mimics the real Church. 

Now, Francis will go down in history as the Pope who made a deal with the devil. 

Magister reports below at the link and by clicking on the labels at the bottom, you can find my other posts.

http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1351357?eng=y

In Appointing Bishops, the Pope Leans Toward Beijing

He is preparing, that is, to grant the communist authorities the privilege of selecting candidates. And he is exiling to an island in the Pacific the highest ranking Chinese archbishop in the curia, contrary to the agreement. But in China, Cardinal Zen has already taken the lead in the rebellion

by Sandro Magister



ROME, August 14, 2016 – In China, among the one hundred and nine Catholic bishops there are eight who have been consecrated at the behest of the communist authorities and who have never received the pope's approval, thereby incurring excommunication, a couple of them with children and lovers.

But for none other than these eight, by the end of this summer or at the latest before the end of the jubilee Francis is ready to perform a spectacular gesture: a pardon.

Tuesday 9 August 2016

The Vatican sells out the real Catholics of China

Looks as if I was right!

And here:

http://voxcantor.blogspot.ca/2016/04/the-real-catholics-of-china-about-to-be.html

And here:
http://voxcantor.blogspot.ca/2016/01/cardinal-zen-calls-out-francis-parolin.html


St. Augustine Zhao Rong & Companions, Ora Pro Nobis! Chinese Martyrs.



Is the sell-out of Mindzenty and Slipyj for "Ostpolitik" about to be repeated in China?

Originally published on March 27, 2015.

Last week, a friend with strong ties to various figures in the Holy See told me over lunch something brewing on the front-burner in Rome. I was sworn to refrain from blogging and even now, cannot say more that I know but there is a story made public earlier this week by Sandro Magister. 

Is this potential of diplomatic relations between The Holy See and the communist People's Republic of China something which we've seen this before? Is history is repeating itself?



Is the Ostpolitik of Paul VI and the sell-out of Hungary and Ukraine and the great Cardinals Mindzenty and Slipyj about to repeated by making a deal with the devil himself?

Is the persecution of Roman Catholics in the People's Republic of China to be ignored for the sake of diplomatic prestige and convenience?


Are the Vatican diplomats, held at bay by Benedict XVI, ready to put before Pope Francis the selling out of millions of Catholic bishops, priests, religious and laity who gave up their lives for their faith rather than submit to the communist devils?


What is the price for relations with China?


What will this mean for the Nunciature in Taiwan and the Catholics there?



Click above for link to Ignatuis Press
Will the Church recognise these schismatic bishop of the Chinese Patriotic Association who sold-out to the communists and still not find a way for the good bishops and priests and religious of the Society of St. Pius X to find a sure way home and a secure structure in which to evangelise?

What would relations with China mean for its evil "one-child policy" and forced abortion upon women? Will the Church demand it be dropped for recognition and diplomatic relations?


What would it mean for the real Catholic Church in China, that which is underground; will they become the new schismatics?


What of the opinion of the great Emeritus Cardinal Zen of Hong Kong; who says, "no agreement is better than a bad agreement? 


Are we about to see the Catholic Church make an equivalent deal as Obama with Iran on nuclear weapons for the sake of an agreement?


Perhaps there has been too much reading around the Vatican of Mao's Little Red Book and not enough about The Red Book of Chinese Martyrs.


http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1351013?eng=y

The Cardinals Are Dueling Over China, but the Mandarins Dominate the Game“No agreement is better than a bad agreement,” says Zen, criticizing secretary of state Parolin. The pope is keeping silent. And Shanghai remains without its bishop, under arrest for three years
by Sandro Magister



ROME, March 25, 2015 – “Do I want to go to China? Absolutely: tomorrow! All the Church is asking for is freedom for its mission, no other condition." This is what Francis said on August 18 of last year, while he was crossing over Chinese airspace, the first time any pope had done so.
Seven months have gone by since then, and the statements of readiness for “fruitful dialogue” have multiplied. On the Vatican side, with the voices of cardinal secretary of state Pietro Parolin and of Fr. Federico Lombardi. And on the Chinese side from the mouth of the spokesmen of the foreign ministry, Hua Chunying and Hong Lei.
At the beginning of March Fr. Lombardi granted a long interview to Phoenix TV, a Hong Kong television channel close to the central government. In it, among other things, he expressed hopes for an agreement on episcopal ordinations in China similar to the one in place in Vietnam – set up by none other than Parolin when he was undersecretary for relations with states – in which the Holy See presents its candidate to the government and if this does not approve presents another, until there is agreement on both sides.
In the name of the Chinese foreign ministry, spokesman Hong Lei echoed the interview with Fr. Lombardi with soothing statements released to the English-language newspaper “Global Times,” an outlet of the communist party. These were accompanied, however, by this tap on the brakes:
“Beijing on Thursday [March 12] urged the Vatican to face the historical tradition and reality of Catholics in China, after the Vatican reportedly suggested a joint review on bishop ordination.”
In effect, the ordinations of bishops are a crucial question for the Catholic Church in China. With Mao Zedong in the 1950’s the communist authorities appropriated the appointment of bishops, creating the structures of a Church subservient to the regime, independent of Rome and potentially schismatic, as well as being in conflict with the Chinese bishops and priests faithful to the pope but not recognized by the government and therefore in a situation of permanent illegality and of dramatic vulnerability.
After the end of Maoism, the Holy See succeeded in reconciling some of the illegitimate bishops with itself. But the authorities of Beijing never abandoned the “tradition” inaugurated by Mao, which continues to have its executive and supervisory body in the so-called patriotic association of Chinese Catholics and its formal expression in a puppet episcopal conference never recognized by Rome.
Vatican efforts to reconstruct the unity and fidelity of the Chinese Church reached their peak with the publication in 2007 of a letter from Pope Benedict XVI to the Catholics of China, a document that Pope Francis has confirmed, calling it “fundamental” and “timely” and thereby accepting its guidelines:
Letter...
That year Benedict XVI also set up a commission expressly dedicated to examining the case of China, made up of officials of the secretariat of state and of the congregation for the evangelization of peoples, of representatives of the Chinese bishops, of missionaries and experts. The commission met periodically and there was a prominent role on it for Hong King cardinal Joseph Zen Ze-kiun.
But the Chinese authorities continued to ordain bishops not recognized by Rome. The latest two, installed in 2011 in the dioceses of Leshan and Shantou, were excommunicated by the Holy See, which also asked the bishops who had taken part in the illicit ordinations to justify their actions, on pain of excommunication for them as well.
The following year came the most spectacular case, that of the new coadjutor bishop of the archdiocese of Shanghai, Thaddeus Ma Daqin. Ordained on July 7 of 2012 with the approval of both the Holy See and the Chinese government, he quit the patriotic association on the same day, obeying the 2007 letter of Benedict XVI, which defined membership in the association as incompatible with fidelity to the Church. And because of this he was immediately punished with house arrest, which made it impossible for him to take up the succession of the elderly archbishop of Shanghai, Aloysius Jin Luxian, who died in April of 2013.Since then the diocese of Shanghai has remained headless, with its legitimate bishop still under house arrest, bearing witness at a high price to fidelity to the universal Church.
But meanwhile the pope has changed. Benedict XVI has been succeeded by Francis. And the diplomats have regained power in the Vatican.
With the new pope, the commission for China has not been convened again. The combative approach of confrontation with the regime embodied by Cardinal Zen has been replaced with an approach of reiterated offerings of dialogue and of silence on the painful points.
To their own advantage, the proponents of this diplomatic approach attribute to themselves the cessation of the appointment of illegitimate bishops since 2012.
But on the part of Rome, the appointments of faithful bishops have also ceased. With the consequence of a growing number of dioceses deprived of leadership.
The resumption of illegitimate ordinations also continues to hang like a sword of Damocles. Last January it was the ministry of religious affairs that threatened a new batch of appointments without papal mandate in 2015.From what has leaked out, the Vatican authorities are trying to coax Beijing into an agreement on the appointment of bishops according to the model of Vietnam.
And in order to reach this goal they are willing to keep public silence on everything. Even on the most offensive prevarications of the Chinese authorities toward the Catholic Church.
Silence on the enduring impediment on the bishop of Shanghai’s exercising his office.
Silence on the disappearance of Bishop Cosma Shi Enxiang of Yixian, in Hebei, arrested on Good Friday of 2001 and imprisoned in an unknown location. Last January 30 his relatives were given the news of his death, at the age of 93, news that was afterward retracted confusedly and without explanation.
Silence on the disappearance of another bishop, James Su Zhi-min of Baoding, taken away by the police 18 years ago and never heard from again.
The official Vatican media are silent on everything that could irritate the Chinese authorities. For information on the persecution of the Church in China, the most timely and trustworthy Catholic source is the online agency “Asia News," published in Italian, English, and Chinese, founded and directed by Fr. Bernardo Cervellera of the Pontifical Institute for Foreign Missions.
On the other hand, beating the drum with boundless optimism for the approach currently adopted by the Vatican diplomats is the journalist and expert on China Gianni Valente, a friend of Jorge Mario Bergoglio from before his election as pope and a writer for “Fides,” the online agency of the Vatican congregation for the evangelization of peoples, as well as being a prominent contributor to the portal “Vatican Insider.”
The historical model to which Valente refers, in dealing with the question of China, is the “Ostpolitik” practiced by the Vatican with the regimes of the Soviet empire, overlooking the fact that at the time this diplomatic stance was balanced and ultimately supplanted by the different approach that had in John Paul II its victorious protagonist.
And also today the diplomatic steps underway in China do not fail to raise criticisms.The most explicit and authoritative of these come from Cardinal Zen, who gave a lively reaction last February 17 to two interviews - with “leading questions,” according to him - conducted by Valente for “Vatican Insider” with two Chinese bishops in communion with Rome:
 Zen: It looks like someone is trying to shout us down 
Referring explicitly to secretary of state Parolin, Zen warned against concession: “No agreement is better than a bad agreement. We cannot, pro bono pacis, tolerate an agreement which betrays our identity.”
This was followed by another interview “steered” by Valente with a third Chinese bishop. And also the publication, by “Vatican Insider,” of a stinging “ad personam” invective against Cardinal Zen, signed by a Chinese priest and blogger, Paul Han Qing Ping:
> "Cardinal Zen, don’t you believe in miracles?"
And then again by a defense on Valente’s part of the Vietnam model in the appointment of bishops. The limitations of which were however brought to light by “Asia News,” in a letter from a Vietnamese Catholic and above all in an editorial by Fr. Cervellera on the grave risks of the Vatican’s striking a diplomatic agreement without first establishing commitments in terms of religious freedom:
> Nothing to toast between China and the Vatican: Beijing wants complete control
Freedom for the Church, without conditions, is exactly what Pope Francis has said that he wants, in his most explicit statement on China so far, seven months ago.
After which he has said nothing more about this. On January 19, flying over China for a second time, he limited himself to saying, after justifying the lack of an audience with the Dalai Lama: “The Chinese government is considerate, and we too are considerate and do things step by step, as things are done in history.”
Not one word on China, not even in the speech that the pope had given to the diplomatic corps a week before.

The guidelines of the 2007 letter of Benedict XVI are still in place. But between Parolin and Zen, Francis seems to side with the former.
___________

The three interviews of Gianni Valente with the three Chinese bishops criticized by Cardinal Zen:
> Joseph Wei Jingyi, Bishop of Qiqihar
> Joseph Han Zhi-hai, Bishop of Lanzhou
> Paul Xie Ting-zhe, Bishop of Urumqi
__________

All of the previous articles on this topic:
> Focus on CHINA
__________
In the photo, Cardinal Zen, behind the banner, demonstrates in Hong Kong for the truth on the disappearance of Bishop Cosma Shi Enxiang.