Monday, February 12, 2018

State-sponsored Apostolic Succession

On 12/26/17, this blog posted an entry entitled Apostolic Succession, concluding that an apostle of Christ does not necessarily have to have a direct link to the pope, the successor of Peter, yet it had not gone to an extreme reaching the unthinkable that a Catholic bishop could be sponsored and appointed by a secular state without any historical evidence whatsoever suggesting an "[a]lignment with scriptural teaching." [1]

Having an alignment with Christ is consistent with the Vatican's position:

The apostolic succession of the ministry concerns the whole Church, but it is not something that derives from the Church taken as a whole but rather from Christ to the apostles and from the apostles to all bishops to the end of time. [2]


Apparently, the Vatican's position above will have to be updated to reflect what could take place based on an article published by the Federalist  dated February 12, 2018 [3]:

Last week, the Vatican announced that Pope Francis plans to replace two Chinese bishops loyal to Rome with seven excommunicated men chosen by Beijing. Two of those seven men are alleged to have girlfriends and fathered children. Most importantly, all seven men put their loyalty to China’s communist government before their faith in God.

China has long demanded that the Vatican accept only Chinese government-appointed bishops and give them full authority to rule a Chinese diocese. But Francis’s predecessors in the Catholic Church have long believed, as Pope Benedict XVI said, “the authority of the Pope to appoint bishops is given to the church by its founder Jesus Christ. It is not the property of the Pope, neither can the Pope give it to others.”

Yet in Pope Francis the atheist Chinese Communist government found a willing partner eager to give in to their demands. Pope Francis seems to have no problem subordinating his authority to a repressive communist government. Even China’s state-run newspaper Global Times acknowledged that Pope Francis has made “substantial concession.”


Earlier, on February 2, 2018, America The Jesuit Review  filed this report entitled China and the Vatican are close to a groundbreaking agreement,  parts of which are quoted below [4]:


One of the most contentious problems that remained to be resolved, however, related to the seven Chinese bishops (originally eight but one died) whom the Holy See considers illegitimate because they received episcopal ordination without the papal mandate, in breach of canon law. Indeed, three of them were formally excommunicated for this. Chinese Catholics, moreover, raised questions regarding the moral suitability of two of the seven. From the start of negotiations, the Chinese insisted that all seven had to be legitimized and recognized by the Holy See as the ordinary bishops of their respective dioceses.

After considerable reflection and investigation, the Holy See concluded that it could recognize all seven. Pope Francis is expected to sign a decree that lifts the excommunication on the three bishops subject to such penalty, grants pardon to all seven illicit bishops and recognizes them as legitimate bishops in the Catholic Church and as ordinaries in the seven dioceses where they now reside. America has learned that already each of the seven bishops has asked the pope for pardon and has requested reconciliation with him and the universal church.

But there was still a problem to be resolved: Two of the seven are in dioceses—Shantou and Mindong—where the so-called underground church community is much larger than that of the open one and is led by two highly respected underground bishops, Msgr. Peter Zhuang Jianjian and Msgr. Joseph Guo Xijin. Both dioceses have official and underground bishops today. To resolve the problem regarding the leadership of those dioceses, it was necessary for the Holy See’s delegation to meet and present the proposal to the two underground pastors and, if possible, gain their acceptance of it “for the good and the future of the whole church in China.” The Holy See’s proposal invited Msgr. Zhuang, now 88, to resign and make way for the illicit Msgr. Huang Bingzhang to become bishop of Shantou diocese. Likewise, it invited Bishop Guo Xijin to step down and accept to become auxiliary or coadjutor to the illicit Msgr. Zhan Silu in Mindong diocese.

Vatican's canonically-appointed bishops are asked to step down to make way for state-sponsored and appointed bishops.  Does this mean than any Catholic bishop is now at risk when a state exercises its powers to replace bishops that are not in accordance with secular mores of the day?  Can a pro-life bishop be asked to step down because a state finds abortion to be legal?  Can a Catholic priest or a bishop be asked to step down because he refuses to perform a marriage between two women or two men?

What is the other side of the Vatican's forked tongue saying?  Does that mean that Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre's appointment of bishops are no longer excommunicated, and the schism no longer exist?  Below is a look back at the excommunication of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and his bishops, quoted in part from SSPX [5]:

On July 1, 1988, Cardinal Bernardin Gantin, Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, signed a decree of excommunication announcing that Archbishop Lefebvre, Bishop de Castro Mayer, and the four new bishops had performed a schismatic act and excommunicated themselves latae sententiae (automatically) in accordance with the provisions of canon 1382 of the Code of Canon Law:

A bishop who consecrates someone a bishop without a pontifical mandate and the person who receives the consecration from him incur a latae sententiae excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See.”

The following day, July 2, 1988, Pope John Paul II issued the apostolic letter motu proprio, Ecclesia Dei adflicta, confirming the excommunications and the existence of a schism.

The Society of St. Pius X has always contested the juridical validity of the censure. Besides other considerations, the excommunication was not incurred because a person who violates a law out of necessity is not subject to a penalty (canon 1323 §4), and even if there is no state of necessity, when one inculpably thought the opposite he would not incur the penalty (canon 1323 §7); and if one culpably thought there was such a state of necessity, he would still incur no automatic penalties (canon 1324 §3).

What is really happening with the Catholic Church?  Is nothing sacrosanct anymore?  Should this pope be (automatically) excommunicated at the moment he permits state-sponsored and appointed bishops to serve the Catholic Church?



[1] https://www.gotquestions.org/apostolic-succession.html, last paragraph.
[2] http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_cti_1973_successione-apostolica_en.html, Section V, last paragraph.
[3] http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/12/accepting-communist-chosen-bishops-pope-francis-betrays-chinese-christians/, quoted without hyperlinks.
[4] https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2018/02/02/china-and-vatican-are-close-groundbreaking-agreement
[5] http://fsspx.org/en/sspx%E2%80%99s-bishops

No comments:

Post a Comment