Vatican excommunicates Chinese bishop

It looked like things were going so well just a week ago, and now it sems like the Vatican and the Party are once more at one another’s throats.

The Vatican lashed out Thursday at Beijing, announcing the excommunication of two bishops who were ordained by China’s state-controlled church without Pope Benedict XVI’s consent. Benedict’s first major political clash since his election as pontiff a year ago dimmed hopes for any re-establishment soon of official ties between the Holy See and Beijing that ended after communists took control of China in 1949.

Also automatically excommunicated for defying the pope were the bishops who performed the ordinations in separate ceremonies since Sunday, according to a provision of church law cited by Vatican spokesman Joaquin Navarro-Valls. Benedict learned about the defiant ordinations “with great sadness,” said Navarro-Valls. “It is a great wound to the unity of the church.”

I still can’t figure it out. Hu had been winning invaluable PR for improving ties to the Vatican, and now he appears to be back to square one.

The Discussion: 48 Comments

I don’t have problem with Christianity. Instead, I wish one day I’d get the “spark” that triggered the belief of the old gentleman who visited me over the last 5 years.

But any spark, under certain circumstances, could invoke serious consequences. Think what the famous “Single Spark” did.

Have a look at what Beatrice Leung, a Catholic nun and professor in Taiwan, has to say:

May 5, 2006 @ 3:08 am | Comment

This is what I was talking about last time. The Vatican was not going to just give in to the CCP because the Communists have a stick up their arses about themselves. I’m starting to see these people as the vain types that always carry a comb in their pocket and stop to admire themselves in shop windows and mirrors all the time.

Perhaps Hu thought that the Vatican would just give in. Well if he hadn’t noticed they’re not interested in money (which is what China normally offers) – they’re interested in religion, which is the one thing the CCP keeps screwing them over. I’m glad to see that the Church is not taking this crap lying down and showing Hu they’re pissed off with him. Beijing can treat the Holy See properly or it can not deal with it at all. A little respect is necessary, but Beijing seems to be reluctant to give even that. Well then it’s not going to get the Vatican to switch diplomatic recognition. It’s simple enough and a message that the Communists are going to have to listen to.

May 5, 2006 @ 5:41 am | Comment

It’s not a big deal for China. One thing for sure, it’s Vatican courting China, not the other way around.

Vatican needs China much, much and much more than China needs Vatican, from the CCP’s perspective.

So, for you, nothing to be glad for, because it’s not a victory or upper hand for Vatican, instead a big failure and embarassment.

May 5, 2006 @ 5:50 am | Comment


In this instance you have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about. WHY does the Vatican “NEED” China? What for?

Is the Roman Catholic Church (over one billion people worldwide) going to collapse from lack of support from the CCP? HA!

The Catholic Church has been around for almost 2000 years. The CCP has been around for 86 years. We’ll see which one continues to stand the test of time.

At any rate, it’s ludicrous for you to suggest that the Vatican “needs” China, for anything.

May 5, 2006 @ 6:23 am | Comment

Also, some of you might not know the full significance of excommunication. By excommunicating those fake “bishops”, the Church has sent a message to all Chinese Catholics, that anyone who takes the Communion sacrament from those “bishops” is committing a sin, a serious sacrilege.

Basically this move is saying that the Communist Party’s fake “Catholic” Church has absolutely no authority at best, and at worst is to be avoided and condemned by all Catholics (worldwide.)

It’s serious stuff.

May 5, 2006 @ 6:27 am | Comment

Well, calm down.

It’s about Chinese Patriotic Catholic churchs. They are never under the rule of Pope.

Every believer who goes to those churches understands this, otherwise they go to undergroud churches.

How come the Vatican excommunicate somebody who doesn’t even recognise its authority.

It’s like I disown a kid who has nothing to do with me, both genetically and legally.

What a joke!?

And of course Vatican need China. I’m not saying Vatican need CCP. Why? Find it out yourself, it won’t be very difficult.

May 5, 2006 @ 7:15 am | Comment

Right, I might not have said it very clearly. it shoud be:

Vatican need China much more than CCP need Vatican.

May 5, 2006 @ 7:18 am | Comment

Bing, you’re still full of shit. The Vatican doesn’t need China. The Catholic Church has done just fine without China for nearly 2000 years.

May 5, 2006 @ 7:33 am | Comment

The Church of England considers itself to stand both in a reformed tradition and in a catholic (but not Roman Catholic) church tradition.

I just don’t understand why Vatican hadn’t required a say in appointing bishops of the Church of England before it established tie with UK?

May 5, 2006 @ 7:35 am | Comment

“Bing, you’re still full of shit. The Vatican doesn’t need China. The Catholic Church has done just fine without China for nearly 2000 years.”

Sure, they will “live” without China, just like USA and many other countries.

Have you read an article called “A year without ‘Made in China'”.

Of course what Vatican want is not the cheap imports.

But be realistic, they need China, no matter you see it or not.

May 5, 2006 @ 7:39 am | Comment

Good God, Bing, your ignorance about all this is astonishing. (I’m rolling around laughing right now.)

Bing, you IDIOT! The Vatican never “established a tie with the UK.” The Roman Catholic Church WAS THE FIRST AND ONLY ONE in England until King Henry broke away around 1540.

The Vatican keeps some basically friendly relations with the Church of England, but the Church of England is honest enough NOT to pretend that it’s Catholic. AND, AND, finally, the leaders of the Church of England are NOT FUCKING ATHEISTS like the Communist Party.

Good GOD! You Communists and CCP apologists are SOOOO fucking ignorant about anything outside of your own cultish brainwashing and your total ignorance about history.

May 5, 2006 @ 8:07 am | Comment

What a pathetic Пиздёныш you are Ivan!

May 5, 2006 @ 8:30 am | Comment

While your brain is as clean/clear as shit, you do need mouthwashing.

May 5, 2006 @ 8:35 am | Comment


The flaw in your argument about the UK has nothing to do with what Ivan is talking about. The real flaw is this: there are Catholics in the UK. Many of them. There is no decree making the real Catholic Church illegal in England. Perhaps in the past there was, but in England, people are allowed to practice their religion freely. So the Catholic Church has no bone to pick with the UK. The Patriotic Church is a completely different affair because the PRC government has declared that ONLY their Catholic church is legal in the PRC. This would not be an issue at all if the PRC gave the authentic Catholic Church free rein in China alongside the Patriotic Church. Of course, in this situation, the Patriotic Church would soon find itself without any members.

For the Catholic Church, the loyalty MUST go to the Pope. There are no alternatives because this is a RELIGION. There can’t be a compromise because it is a spiritual belief system. Whether the Catholic Church has political motivations or not, is beside the point. Without the Pope as the head, it cannot be a Catholic Church. So, Bing, your argument that the Church needs the PRC more than the PRC needs the Church is also false. Regardless of the political or membership implications, the Church does NOT need anyone who is not going to respect the basic laws of the Church.

Bing, as this is probably not your religion, perhaps this point has been lost on you, so I can’t blame you too much. But to firm believers in the Church, what you say is absolutely preposterous. And if you still are unconvinced, compare the numbers of adherents to the underground, real Catholic Church in the PRC and the numbers of the Patriotic Church.

May 5, 2006 @ 9:21 am | Comment

“The Church of England considers itself to stand both in a reformed tradition and in a catholic (but not Roman Catholic) church tradition”.

These are not my words. They come from Wikipedia.

So out there there are people who believe when you say “Catholic” it does not necessarily mean Roman Catholic.

Vatican should fight for the rights of underground churches, not mess with the patriotic ones.

May 5, 2006 @ 9:55 am | Comment

The point about Anglicanism is that it’s the state church of the UK – Britain’s equivalent of the “patriotic catholics” in China. Since the Vatican recognises Anglicanism as a branch of christianity, there’s no particular reason why they couldn’t likewise recognise patriotic catholics likewise. Maybe this was the deal that Hu was after. he would hve benefitted quite a lot from having the state controlled catholic movement recognised as a sister church in Christianity by the Vatican.

May 5, 2006 @ 10:28 am | Comment

while the church of english made a formal theological break from the vatican, chinese catholic church broke itself off on political ground. in theory therefore, chinese catholics are still practicing roman catholic faith, without involving the roman catholic pope, a very different situation from the anglican church.

May 5, 2006 @ 10:29 am | Comment

Again, how can some of you be so FUCKING STUPID? I mean this is just ridiculous. Jamie wrote: “Anglicanism is…Britain’s equivalent of the ‘patriotic catholics’ in China.”

NO IT’S NOT, you thick-headed twit. Listen – listen carefully and get this through your brainwashed skulls: The Church of England is RUN BY CHRISTIANS, but China’s “patriotic” churches are run by the atheistic Communist Party. There is absolutely no similarity between them.

The Church of England is led by Christians, and China’s ‘patriotic’ churches are run by an atheist political party which is a sworn enemy of Christianity.


May 5, 2006 @ 10:33 am | Comment

The head of the church of England is the Queen, in her role as the head of the British state. The Archbishop of Canterbury, who runs (or RUNS) the church is subject to the veto of the Prime Minister, who has the power to recommend a candidate of his own. The Cof E is the original patriotic church. Or maybe that should be ORIGINAL.

May 5, 2006 @ 11:05 am | Comment

i’ve been kinda wondering, what if the queen of england is not an anglican? (that’s happened before and wasnt too pleasant when it happened… but that was then). or if she is a christian committing a little unchristian act here ‘n there, like princess diana?

May 5, 2006 @ 11:12 am | Comment

She has to be, by law (at least since about 1600). So does the Prime Minister.

May 5, 2006 @ 1:32 pm | Comment

Bing, WHY does the Vatican need China? As I already said, IT ISN’T INTERESTED IN MONEY!

Please, tell us specifically why this is the case, rather than just fly on autopilot and say “[INSERT COUNTRY NAME HERE] needs China”.

Come on! You’re quoting wikipedia? Surely you know how reliable that is.

Wow and to think people used to make a song and dance about your blog. You use wiki to prove your point?!

Jamie, regardless of the status of the CoE, Britons are allowed to be proper Roman Catholics. That is not possible in China. End of story.

May 5, 2006 @ 1:51 pm | Comment


Don’t mix me with Bingfeng, I’m not Bingfeng

May 5, 2006 @ 1:56 pm | Comment

Why does Vatican need China?

Of course in this modern world every country needs to work with other countries. But that is not the point I was making in my previous posts.

I said: Vatican needs much more than CCP needs Vatican.

Do you have a problem with that?

And in previous posts, somebody metioned if Vatican is allowed the authority in China, nobody will go to Patriotic churches. Why are you so sure? Do take it for granted. Do you think the 4 milions Ptriotic church goers are nuts? Why people have to go to Pope to follow the Catholic tradition?

If Vatican can’t have control on the millions of Chinese catholics. How can you be sure there won’t be a possibility that they could in fact form a separate section like Church of England or Russian Orthodox. Do you think Vatican would be happy to see that happen?

If Vatican didn’t need China, why even considering severing tie with Taiwan, a democratic, well, body, for the sake of communist China?

Read the excerpt from Washington post:
“China has an estimated 12 million Catholics — 4 million in the Patriotic church, 8 million underground — and the Vatican considers the country a major frontier it needs to reopen. With its blend of communist-style authoritarian control, Confucian rationality and burgeoning presence on the world economic and political stage, China represents a giant philosophical rival to the Vatican.

Last November, Cardinal Camillo Ruini, the pope’s deputy bishop of Rome, noted that the attention recently given to the upsurge of Islamic fervor must also be afforded China, which stands among newly emergent countries that have “the capacity and the will to be protagonists, not subordinates, on the global stage” and “will perhaps push us toward further secularization.”


Vatican needs China to be on its side, needs to have a say in China, that’s why Vatican needs China.

May 5, 2006 @ 2:28 pm | Comment

Sorry, I said:

I said: Vatican needs China much more than CCP needs Vatican.

May 5, 2006 @ 2:29 pm | Comment

In terms of Wikipedia, I don’t think it’s anything less authoritative than most of us commenting here.

May 5, 2006 @ 2:43 pm | Comment

Bing it isn’t about the Vatican “needing” anyone. They don’t NEED to deal with Beijing. There are 12 million Catholics in China? Well how many Catholics are there in the world?

The Vatican WANTS to reach a deal with Beijing so that it can protect those millions. But it would prefer to have no deal than get an unreasonable one on Beijing’s terms, especially because it couldn’t protect those people if it caved in.

If you can’t accept this then I suggest you watch how things continue from hereon. I don’t expect the Vatican to change its position.

May 5, 2006 @ 3:00 pm | Comment

Right, the holy see wants to protect those poor lambs and that’s the only reason that they deal with the evil CCP.

How altruistic the Vatican is!

Don’t you know the only thing that “ANGERS” Vatican this time is not that some poor lambs were persecuted, but its authority challenged?

As I metioned before, I’m not against Vatican or Christianity.

I’m merely stating the reality: Vatican needs China much more than CCP needs Vatican.

That’s it.

May 5, 2006 @ 3:09 pm | Comment

And please read what Cardinal Camillo Ruini said.

May 5, 2006 @ 3:11 pm | Comment

Haven’t the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association been appointing its own bishops for the last 50+ years? Is this the first time the Vatican has excommunicated bishops appointed by the Chinese patriotic church?

May 5, 2006 @ 4:17 pm | Comment

I still can’t figure it out. Hu had been winning invaluable PR for improving ties to the Vatican, and now he appears to be back to square one.

I don’t think the appointments of the bishops are Hu’s doing. Local bishop appointments and even the running of the entire Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association (CPCA) are pretty insignificant in terms of China’s national political scene and are not matters that would normally involve the general secretary of the CCP.

I think it’s more likely that the appointments of the bishops are simply the CPCA acting in its own interests. The CPCA is currently the sole official church authorities in China. In any sort of agreement between the PRC and the Vatican, the CPCA’s authority over church affairs will be decreased. Hence, it’s in the CPCA’s interest that negotiations between the PRC and the Vatican break down. Also, even if some sort of agreement between the PRC and the Vatican is inevitable, the CPCA would still want to fill all openings with its own people before the agreement takes place.

May 5, 2006 @ 5:02 pm | Comment

I think it’s clear that Bing cannot understand how the mind of religious people work.

Mormons go around the world preaching because they think they’re saving people (in their own spiritual way). The Roman Catholic church is trying to do the same thing. It totally makes sense for the Roman Catholic Church to break diplomacy with Taiwan if it feels it can save (in its own way) the people in China, because irrespective of political status, Taiwan will always allow Roman Catholicism to be practiced.

Bing, can you explain why the Vatican needs China and therefore would need to compromize to the CCP?

Please use an explanation other than “it is so.” By doing so you’re being an enemy of the people.

May 5, 2006 @ 7:35 pm | Comment

Remember tithe? that is what Vatican is in China for.

May 5, 2006 @ 8:33 pm | Comment

“And in previous posts, somebody metioned if Vatican is allowed the authority in China, “nobody will go to Patriotic churches. Why are you so sure? Do take it for granted. Do you think the 4 milions Ptriotic church goers are nuts? Why people have to go to Pope to follow the Catholic tradition?”

They’re not nuts. They’re following orders, doing the best they can legally. It speaks loads that the underground Church is twice as large though, as I said.

“If Vatican can’t have control on the millions of Chinese catholics. How can you be sure there won’t be a possibility that they could in fact form a separate section like Church of England or Russian Orthodox. Do you think Vatican would be happy to see that happen?”

You did not read my original post carefully. The Vatican probably would not care if the Patriotic Church were declared a separate church as long as the real Catholic Church were allowed to legally set up shop. They would not care because, their own membership recruitment efforts would not be foiled. Plus, they would undoubtedly get quite a few converts from the Patriotic Church. Don’t forget that one of the basic laws of the Catholic Church is that the Pope is at the head. If the Patriotic Church wants to form its own Church, they can’t be a Catholic one. That’s why the Anglicans don’t go around calling themselves Catholic, even though the two organizations are very close.

“If Vatican didn’t need China, why even considering severing tie with Taiwan, a democratic, well, body, for the sake of communist China?”

Once again, this is not a question of NEED. Honestly, some of you in here are bordering on being rude by invoking this need thing. It is a question of uplifting the masses. China has potentially more masses to uplift in the eyes of the Church. Even the 8 million in the underground Church alone far dwarfs the number of Catholics in Taiwan. This isn’t a question of need. It is an ideological question of seeking to save (whether saving is really needed or not). The Church comes closer to its goals if it can operate freely in the PRC. But it in no way NEEDS the PRC to accomplish its goals no more than God (whether you believe in the Christian god or not) needs the PRC. Do you see the blasphemy? The Church is a representative body of God. By saying that the Church NEEDS the PRC or anyone, you are saying that God NEEDS the PRC. I don’t care if it is your tradition or not in this case. Such a declaration is absurd. Supposing the existence of that God, he could wipe the whole country off the Earth without effort. Now tell me, how does the Church need the PRC? YES, it is an earth-bound organization that is much involved politically. But ideologically, there is no NEED of the PRC. So, seeing as how the Roman Catholic Church is already the world’s largest religious organization, and they have plenty of monetary and membership support, and they are an organ of God, they can do without the PRC for a loooooong time.

Does the PRC need the Church? No, not really. Which is the essence of the current problem. The PRC wants the Church because it could give them a one-up on Taiwan. But they don’t want that one-up so badly that they are prepared to accept the legality of the Church. On the other hand, the Church wants to have free rein in China, but it does not want it enough to accept giving up its divinely placed authority.

So stop talking about NEED please. It just makes no sense from any side.

May 5, 2006 @ 8:49 pm | Comment

i agree with bing on this one because he made a statment on comparing the vatican’s need of china versus china’s need of the vatican.

tell me why does china need to establish relationship with them. taiwan??? respect of the world??? if all catholic countries refuses to deal with china because of lack of relations with the vatican then there might be a real need. will other countries critize china less if they establish relations…i don’t think so.

mean while, the vatican is seeing millions of chinese becoming buddhist, flgers, protestants…etc. of course they would like to turn some of them into catholics

May 5, 2006 @ 8:53 pm | Comment

“chinesedude”, you mentioned just ONE thing which
is worth considering, about the flg. But the Vatican doesn’t lose any sleep over the flg. China’s government does.

If they didn’t outlaw the more reasonable, ancient, and traditionally law-abiding religions like Catholicism, they might not have such a problem with cults like the FLG.

May 6, 2006 @ 12:25 am | Comment

Oh and more about this nonsense about “need”:
The CCP whores here have no idea of how incredibly wealthy the Catholic Church is.

To repeat: nearly 2000 years. That’s an old, old bank account, so to speak.

Materially, all they “need” from the PRC are cheap plastic key-chains and cheap socks which get worn out after a week.

May 6, 2006 @ 12:31 am | Comment

Just call me a philosphical Daoist.

May 6, 2006 @ 12:41 am | Comment

Lisa, correct your thoughts! You must only belong to the Chinese Patriotic Philosophical Daoist Association!

Correct your thoughts! Follow the Correct Path of Marxist-Leninist-Philosophical Daoism, under the Correct Leadership of the Communist Party!

May 6, 2006 @ 1:01 am | Comment

Last November, Cardinal Camillo Ruini, the pope’s deputy bishop of Rome, noted that the attention recently given to the upsurge of Islamic fervor must also be afforded China, which stands among newly emergent countries that have “the capacity and the will to be protagonists, not subordinates, on the global stage” and “will perhaps push us toward further secularization.”

It doesn’t sound like, from what Cardinal Camilo Ruini said, saving Chinese christians is the only purpose that Vatican wants to talk to CCP. What does this “push us toward further secularization” mean to you?

Thomas, I don’t disagrree with you, from a RELIGIOUS perspective.

But it’s not about religion, but POLITICS and POWER.

Don’t tell me that Roman Catholic lasted 2000 years just because of its religious supremacy.

And it’s naive and absurb to separate ideology from polictics.

May 6, 2006 @ 1:23 am | Comment

Bing, you’re just a broken record player repeating the same section of a track over and over again. Vatican does not “need” China. 12 million Catholics means nothing given that it already has a massive support base globally. Indeed it’s questionable how many other Chinese would become Catholic in the future, given the general atheist/agnostic attitude the majority has.

If you cannot demonstrate what specific need the Vatican has of China then there’s no point talking to you any more.

And I would say that China has an interest in making up with the Vatican. The underground church is larger than the official one and, unsuprisingly, the CCP is worried about this. It would much prefer having them all together in one church that it would have some control over, than operating underground and having no control.

May 6, 2006 @ 5:04 am | Comment

Raj, if I were a broken record player repeating the same section of a track over and over again, then you are just an unlearned ignorant incapable of understanding a simple issue.

If you can’t grasp any sense from the paragraph I cited for your “specific need”, that’s your problem.

May 6, 2006 @ 5:14 am | Comment

Bing said: “Don’t tell me that the Roman Catholic Church lasted for 2000 years just because of its religious supremacy.”

Alright, I won’t tell you that – mostly because “supremacy” is the wrong word. A more accurate way to say it – which I WILL say to you – is:
“The Catholic Church lasted for 2000 years because of the essential appeal and attractiveness of its spiritual and moral teachings.”

In contrast, the Soviet Russian Communist Party – from which the CCP derived its original authority and claim to “correctness” and pretension to be the wave of the future – lasted from 1917 until 1991, and no it no longer exists.
It died because it was always spiritually dead.
Just like the CCP.

May 6, 2006 @ 5:25 am | Comment

Or more precisely, the Catholic Church is a corrupt organisation (just like all Human organisations are) with a profound tradition of truth and beauty at its core – while in contrast, the Communist Party is a corrupt organisation which is founded on the anti-Humanist belief that Humans are mere material things like machines to be manipulated.

Another essential contrast between Christianity and Communism: Regardless of how many of his followers have corrupted his teaching, the founder of Christianity taught the essential value of weaker people, and the idea that Truth is a higher value than Power. Communism (especially the Leninist variety) teaches the opposite: No mercy for the weak, and the idea that the Power of the Communist Party justified any and every kind of lie. Which is, exactly, idolatry and superstition.

May 6, 2006 @ 5:32 am | Comment

A few more notes about the history of Roman Catholics in England (because this vicious, bald-faced lie of the CCP about how the China’s “official” Catholic Church is equivalent to the Church of England, just drives me mad):

1. For a few years in the 1500s, under King Henry the Eighth, yes it was illegal for Roman Catholics to hold mass. And shame on King Henry for that, and shame on the CCP for doing the same thing to Chinese Catholics today – and even MORE shame on the CCP, because, UNLIKE King Henry, the CCP’s Constitution promises “freedom of religion.” King Henry, at least, was not a hypocrite about repressing all other religions except the one under his control. He didn’t pretend to protect “freedom of religion” like the filthy lying Communists do.

2. By the time of Elizabeth the First (reigned from 1558-1603) Roman Catholics were at least tolerated in England, and left free to gather privately – which is NOT the case in today’s China. Under Elizabeth, the Roman Catholics were not allowed to hold political office, and they suffered from various other losses of liberties and privileges – but from Elizabeth’s time onward, at least they were left in peace to practice their own religion in private. That was one reason, among many, why she was such a brilliant Queen. (Partly because she herself had suffered – as a Protestant – from religious persecution during the reign of her Catholic sister Mary who was Queen before her. Mary was a real shit, a religious fanatic. Elizabeth’s greatness resided in her rising above the religious intolerance of her day….even Roman Catholic English people admired her and (most) were loyal to her….THAT is what a WISE leader does…offer liberty and tolerance to the religious minorities, and then you gain their loyalty…)

3. Actually there were two Catholic monarchs of England after King Henry: Charles the Second (who converted on his deathbed) and James the Second (who was an ass and a tyrant.) And meanwhile a large number of English people remained covertly – or quietly – Roman Catholic. They were pretty much left alone as long as they didn’t actually threaten the
state, like Guy Fawkes did in 1605. He was executed for that, and he deserved it. But most English Catholics remained essentially loyal to the Crown and the Government, because they were mostly left in peace from Elizabeth’s reign onward. (With a hiatus under Cromwell of course. But Cromwell’s revolution was rejected in the long run, and then most of the f—ing Puritans moved to America. Too bad for America…)

4. Someone (above) asked what would happen if an English monarch were not in the Church of England. Answer: Impossible. Belonging to the Church of England is a requirement for the job. WHICH means – importantly here – that the head of the Church of England is ALWAYS A CHRISTIAN – thus categorically OPPOSITE of the Communist-atheist leaders of China’s “patriotic” churches.

And I’ll end on that note, because it’s the most important one – and it’s a testament to the rancid stupidity and ignorance of the CCP, that none of them can understand this: It’s absurd and dishonest and disgusting, for an atheist political party, the Communist Party, to pretend to be the highest authority over any religion.
And it is exactly the OPPOSITE of the situation of the Church of England.

May 6, 2006 @ 8:11 am | Comment

Bishops = Apostles

This must be bear in mind
Jesus only appoints apostles or the apostles themselves. Not a communist party.

Even if the communist party is not in communion with the vatican. The big issue is the consecration of the HOLY EUCHARIST.

If you love chinese people. save them from GOD’s anger in the future.

May 15, 2006 @ 5:41 am | Comment

In addition,

It is better to impose ex-communication to china’s bishops.

This may in turn give more persecution, many will die (especially the underground catholics)

but at least the list of saints will be more, than the list of atheist and those who take ill-consecrated “HOST”. I’ll book a ticket to china … its my ticket to sainthood.

Its funny, they (CCP) dont believe in GOD … but is concern of the belief in ONE TRUE GOD.

May 15, 2006 @ 5:50 am | Comment

Any “universal” religion CANNOT ignore the most populous and longest continuous civilization on the planet earth. This is where “need” comes in. CC numbers are dropping in Europe and Latin America. The CC sees Africa and Asia as its future. How can a religion claim to be legitimate if it excludes or ignores a civilization which dominated a hemisphere (culturaly/politically) for millenia?

That said, the whole fake bishop thing is bogus. That’s like me setting up a “church” in my apartment and declaring myself Pope.

May 16, 2006 @ 10:35 am | Comment

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.