China’s First Slap at Pope Leo. Who Suffers It in Silence

The news was lea­ked on April 28, when in Rome the­re was no more Pope Francis and as yet no Pope Leo. And it ran that in Shanghai an assem­bly of priests, nuns, and lay peo­ple under govern­ment obe­dien­ce had been con­ve­ned to rati­fy the selec­tion of a new auxi­lia­ry bishop in the per­son of Ignatius Wu Jianlin, for­mer vicar gene­ral of the dio­ce­se and a mem­ber of the arch-official Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference.

It is true that accor­ding to the agree­ment bet­ween the Holy See and Beijing signed in 2018 the Chinese autho­ri­ties have the fir­st choi­ce of each new bishop, which the pope can appro­ve or not but in fact has so far always endor­sed.

But that this desi­gna­tion was an ump­teenth affront to the Church of Rome was more than evi­dent. Not only becau­se it was car­ried out in the inter­re­gnum bet­ween one pope and the other, as if both coun­ted for nothing, but even more so becau­se in Shanghai – whe­re the head of the dio­ce­se, Bishop Joseph Shen Bin, who is also pre­si­dent of the Chinese pseu­do epi­sco­pal con­fe­ren­ce never reco­gni­zed by Rome, was instal­led in 2023 by a uni­la­te­ral deci­sion of the regi­me only after­ward com­mu­ni­ca­ted to Pope Francis – the­re are alrea­dy two auxi­lia­ry bishops, but both restric­ted : Joseph Xing Wenzi, 62, ordai­ned in 2005 but then fal­len from gra­ce and for­ced to reti­re to pri­va­te life in 2011, and abo­ve all Thaddeus Ma Daqin, 57, who on July 7, 2012, during his epi­sco­pal ordi­na­tion, revo­ked his mem­ber­ship in the govern­men­tal Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association, with the imme­dia­te effect of being held sin­ce then under con­ti­nuous arre­st in the semi­na­ry of Sheshan.

Well then, almo­st six mon­ths after his “elec­tion,” on October 15 Wu Jianlin was ordai­ned bishop, in the wake of a cam­pai­gn to pro­mo­te his appoint­ment con­duc­ted by none other than titu­lar dio­ce­san bishop Shen Bin, with the argu­ment among others that Wu “had to be ordai­ned any­way, having been left as the only non-bishop among the Catholics belon­ging to the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference.”

All this with the pas­si­ve sub­mis­sion of Rome, which limi­ted itself to a laco­nic con­fir­ma­tion of Wu’s ordi­na­tion, decla­ring it “appro­ved” by the pope on August 11.

At the same time a paral­lel sta­te­ment from the offi­cial news agen­cy of the Chinese Catholic Church also repor­ted Wu’s ordi­na­tion, but with the qui­te dif­fe­rent spe­ci­fi­ca­tion that “he was elec­ted bishop on April 28, 2025, by the Catholic dio­ce­se of Shanghai,” without the slighte­st men­tion of the pope’s appro­val.

Presiding over the ordi­na­tion cere­mo­ny (in the pho­to) was, of cour­se, the bishop of Shanghai, Shen Bin. Who, howe­ver, when it came time for him to be instal­led in the dio­ce­se on April 4, 2023, by uni­la­te­ral deci­sion of the Chinese regi­me, had pro­vo­ked a knee-jerk reac­tion from Rome, with Pope Francis indeed appro­ving the appoint­ment on July 15 but accom­pa­ny­ing it with a sta­te­ment from car­di­nal secre­ta­ry of sta­te Pietro Parolin that denoun­ced the vio­la­tion of the agree­men­ts, expres­sed the hope that the­re would be no more vio­la­tions in the futu­re, and urged “a just and wise solu­tion” to the cases of the two auxi­lia­ry bishops alrea­dy pre­sent in the dio­ce­se but still restric­ted.

Protests and requests that all fell on deaf ears, or rather have been top­pled by what has just hap­pe­ned, despi­te the vague announ­ce­ment by Leo– who sin­ce being elec­ted pope has alrea­dy appoin­ted three other bishops in China – that he might act dif­fe­ren­tly in the futu­re, after liste­ning to tho­se “Chinese Catholics who for many years have expe­rien­ced a sort of oppres­sion or dif­fi­cul­ty in living their faith free­ly and without taking sides.”

It now remains to be seen what will hap­pen with the other Chinese bishop who was decla­red “elec­ted” on April 28 : Li Jianlin, can­di­da­te for the dio­ce­se of Xinxiang, about who­se appro­val or lack the­reof on the part of the pope nothing is yet kno­wn.

But perhaps the clo­se­st testing ground on which Pope Leo is awai­ted is now that of Hong Kong, one of two dio­ce­ses in China, along with Macau, that are not sub­ject to the 2018 agree­ment on the appoint­ment of bishops.

In Hong Kong, in fact, the­re is qui­te a stir over the appoint­ment of a second auxi­lia­ry bishop, reque­sted by the cur­rent titu­lar of the dio­ce­se, the car­di­nal and Jesuit Stephen Chow Sauyan.

Chow’s can­di­da­te is Peter Choi Waiman, cur­ren­tly one of the three vicars gene­ral of the dio­ce­se and for at lea­st six years in the run­ning for the post of auxi­lia­ry bishop. Where sin­ce 2014 this role has been held by the Franciscan Joseph Ha Chishing.

But whi­le Ha has always been clo­se to the pro­tests of the Hong Kong demo­cra­cy move­ment and to Cardinal Joseph Zen Zekiun, 93, for­mer bishop of the city from 2002 to 2009, a harsh cri­tic of the com­mu­ni­st regi­me and of the under­stan­ding bet­ween Beijing and the Holy See, Choi has long been the man that Beijing would like to have at the head of the dio­ce­se of Hong Kong, at lea­st as auxi­lia­ry.

Support for Choi’s appoint­ment is thought to come not only from the cur­rent bishop of Hong Kong but also from his pre­de­ces­sor, Cardinal John Tong Hon, to the point that for both, Tong and Choi, news cir­cu­la­ted at the end of September that an audien­ce was sche­du­led in Rome with Pope Leo, on October 4.

Then, howe­ver, on October 2, came a denial that the two would go to Rome. A sign that the que­stion is still open.

But in the mean­ti­me the grea­ter con­cern is that the futu­re for the Catholic Church and other reli­gious deno­mi­na­tions in China is beco­ming ever blea­ker, abo­ve all by the deter­mi­na­tion of the autho­ri­ties in Beijing.

Over the evan­ge­li­cal com­mu­ni­ties a per­se­cu­tion is gathe­ring that accor­ding to some obser­vers is “the most wide­spread in the last for­ty years.” In par­ti­cu­lar, the Zion Church was struck a crip­pling blow in recent days with the arre­st of dozens of its fai­th­ful and of its lea­der Jin Mingri, in his youth among the pro­ta­go­nists of Tiananmen Square.

Moreover, the Department of Religious Affairs has pro­mul­ga­ted a new, pro­hi­bi­ti­ve­ly restric­ti­ve “Code of Conduct for Religious Clergy on the Internet,” which pro­hi­bi­ts any tran­smis­sion of faith and reli­gious for­ma­tion via the web, with very seve­re penal­ties for vio­la­tors.

There was the most com­ple­te silen­ce even at twenty-fifth anni­ver­sa­ry of the cano­ni­za­tion of 120 Chinese mar­tyrs from bet­ween 1648 and 1930, cele­bra­ted by John Paul II on October 1 of the holy year of 2000 : a cano­ni­za­tion that indeed pro­vo­ked a furious reac­tion from the Chinese govern­ment, which bran­ded the­se mar­tyrs of the faith as impe­ria­lists and colo­nia­lists, althou­gh their sto­ries say the exact oppo­si­te. John Paul II then wro­te a let­ter to the Chinese pre­si­dent at the time, Jiang Zemin, asking for “for­gi­ve­ness and under­stan­ding,” without get­ting a reply.

But even more indi­ca­ti­ve of a fur­ther nar­ro­wing of the room for reli­gious free­dom in China is the speech that cur­rent pre­si­dent Xi Jinping gave on September 29 at a spe­cial stu­dy ses­sion of the Politburo of the Chinese Communist Party, which he con­ve­ned pre­ci­se­ly on the the­me of reli­gious poli­cy.

In his speech Xi insi­sted once again on the neces­sa­ry “sini­ci­za­tion” of the reli­gions, that is, the adap­ta­tion “to Chinese cha­rac­te­ri­stics” of “doc­tri­nes, rules, mana­ge­ment systems, rituals, customs, and norms of beha­vior.” This becau­se “for the socia­li­st sta­te led by the Chinese Communist Party it is an una­voi­da­ble requi­re­ment to acti­ve­ly gui­de reli­gion to adapt to socia­li­st socie­ty.”

Evidently for the Chinese autho­ri­ties the appoint­ment of Catholic bishops is also part of this poli­cy of “sini­ci­za­tion,” with an ever more cru­shing domi­na­tion of Beijing over Rome.

*

On October 16 a Catholic of the dio­ce­se of Shanghai publi­shed on “AsiaNews” a heart­felt reflec­tion on the moda­li­ties of the appoint­ment of the new auxi­lia­ry bishop, which reads in part :

“If the truth of the fac­ts is igno­red, if no action is taken regar­ding the impri­son­ment of a bishop alrea­dy legi­ti­ma­te­ly con­se­cra­ted, if the ordi­na­tion of pre­viou­sly unre­co­gni­sed bishops is retroac­ti­ve­ly appro­ved, if we reco­gni­se bishops who mere­ly obey the govern­ment without pro­clai­ming the Gospel… then doub­ts are ine­vi­ta­ble. If the head of the fami­ly, the Holy See, does not teach its chil­dren what is right and what is wrong, if it does not defend the truth to pur­sue instead har­mo­ny without prin­ci­ples, and if it does not pro­mo­te an authen­tic and heal­thy faith… is this tru­ly the com­mu­nion that Christ inten­ded?”

(Translated by Matthew Sherry : traduttore@​hotmail.​com)

— —  — —

Sandro Magister is past “vati­ca­ni­sta” of the Italian wee­kly L’Espresso.
The late­st arti­cles in English of his blog Settimo Cielo are on this page.
But the full archi­ve of Settimo Cielo in English, from 2017 to today, is acces­si­ble.
As is the com­ple­te index of the blog www.chiesa, which pre­ce­ded it.

Retour en haut