Pope pulls speech on Hong Kong freedom, raising questions over Beijing pressure(hk.appledaily.com)
hk.appledaily.com
Pope pulls speech on Hong Kong freedom, raising questions over Beijing pressure
https://hk.appledaily.com/us/20200707/3JPO2PWP2UXTHBOUYIKKMLKKUU/
96 comments
The state sanctioned church "Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association" has only in 2018 acknowledged that the Vatican can veto the appointment of their bishops.
I guess he did not want to upset them after this major concession.
I guess he did not want to upset them after this major concession.
Churches and governments through the ages have always been at odds about this because both are power structures and the Chinese government - unlike many other governments - does not subscribe to any form of power sharing at all. If you look at the role of the Catholic church in Poland during the end of the Communist time then you can understand why: without support of the Church there is a good chance that Solidarity would have been nipped in the bud.
Exactly, this is a centuries-long strategy adopted by the Catholic Church.
This falls into the area of ethics under extortion.
e.g. consider the act of paying a bribe.
Scenario 1: You pay the bribe and make 10x the amount due to faster govt. processing.
Scenario 2: You pay the bribe to save someones life who will die otherwise.
Paying the bribe in Scenario 1 is immoral and paying in Scenario 2 is moral.
Dealing with China is more akin to Scenario 2.
The Catholic church is the oldest institution in the world, it knows it can wait.
e.g. consider the act of paying a bribe.
Scenario 1: You pay the bribe and make 10x the amount due to faster govt. processing.
Scenario 2: You pay the bribe to save someones life who will die otherwise.
Paying the bribe in Scenario 1 is immoral and paying in Scenario 2 is moral.
Dealing with China is more akin to Scenario 2.
The Catholic church is the oldest institution in the world, it knows it can wait.
Given how wealthy and powerful the Catholic church is, and how much the people who run the church would like it to stay that way, I suspect it's not just Scenario 2.
The Catholic church doesn’t globally pool their wealth.
“ In 2010, the Vatican had an income of $326 million and ran a $13 million budget surplus, but in 2011 the Vatican ran a $19 million deficit. And while some of that money obviously went to maintaining church buildings and art, much of it also went to charitable causes.
Recent re-evaluations of Vatican assets show that the Vatican has approximately $1 billion in total assets. For comparison, Harvard University’s endowment is over $30 billion. So, relatively speaking, the Catholic Church is not really wealthy, and no one blames museums for maintaining their art work and structures. “
“ In 2010, the Vatican had an income of $326 million and ran a $13 million budget surplus, but in 2011 the Vatican ran a $19 million deficit. And while some of that money obviously went to maintaining church buildings and art, much of it also went to charitable causes.
Recent re-evaluations of Vatican assets show that the Vatican has approximately $1 billion in total assets. For comparison, Harvard University’s endowment is over $30 billion. So, relatively speaking, the Catholic Church is not really wealthy, and no one blames museums for maintaining their art work and structures. “
The Vatican owns more than 71,659,919 hectares of land around the world, mostly in prime areas of cities. A single hectare in London is worth 7 or 8 million dollars alone. Then there's the massive amounts of gold, buildings, art, etc on top. I can believe the Vatican itself, as in the tiny city state in Italy, is worth $1bn, but the Catholic Church owns hundreds of billions of dollars worth of assets. If they evaluated it all at just $1bn then they lied.
> The Vatican owns more than 71,659,919 hectares of land around the world
No, it doesn't.
Catholic institutions do, perhaps, but the relationship between other Catholic institutions and the Holy See is complicated, both legally and by tradition and more practical concerns.
> I can believe the Vatican itself, as in the tiny city state in Italy, is worth $1bn
I think the reference here to the Vatican is to Holy See, of which the State of Vatican City is a subordinate component.
> but the Catholic Church owns hundreds of billions of dollars worth of assets
The Catholic Church is not, as such, a juridical entity and thus, as such, does not have the capacity to own anything.
No, it doesn't.
Catholic institutions do, perhaps, but the relationship between other Catholic institutions and the Holy See is complicated, both legally and by tradition and more practical concerns.
> I can believe the Vatican itself, as in the tiny city state in Italy, is worth $1bn
I think the reference here to the Vatican is to Holy See, of which the State of Vatican City is a subordinate component.
> but the Catholic Church owns hundreds of billions of dollars worth of assets
The Catholic Church is not, as such, a juridical entity and thus, as such, does not have the capacity to own anything.
The Vatican does not own more than 71 million hectares of land... You might be confusing the Vatican with the Catholic Church.
You might be confusing the Vatican with the Catholic Church.
It's a semantic difference that has no real meaning. Every Catholic church organisation answers to the Vatican. Treating them separately is like treating Apple, Apple UK, and Apple Ireland separately because no, really, they are different legal entities honest.
It's a semantic difference that has no real meaning. Every Catholic church organisation answers to the Vatican. Treating them separately is like treating Apple, Apple UK, and Apple Ireland separately because no, really, they are different legal entities honest.
As the late Terry Pratchett wrote in his book Small Gods, "....the truth is too precious to die for..."
There is also a scenario 1.5: if you don’t pay the bribe you can’t do business at all. The moral implications of that are undecided.
The Vatican and the Chinese government have had an uneasy relationship for a very long time (dare I say forever) and the Vatican has been working hard to reach an agreement about the appointment of bishops and other aspects in 2018.
Perhaps they just felt that making such public comments would achieve nothing apart from undoing that work.
The Catholic Church has been around for almost 2,000 years. I'm sure they know how to play a long game.
Perhaps they just felt that making such public comments would achieve nothing apart from undoing that work.
The Catholic Church has been around for almost 2,000 years. I'm sure they know how to play a long game.
The Church knows how to draft behind power. Hong Kong’s is receding, Beijing’s is burgeoning. No doubt onto whose teat the Church will hungrily latch.
>The Vatican and the Chinese government have had an uneasy relationship for a very long time
They probably picked them after their last relationship, which was about touting the US during the cold war, and working with the far-right to stir hysteria in Italy. How the tides turn...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio
They probably picked them after their last relationship, which was about touting the US during the cold war, and working with the far-right to stir hysteria in Italy. How the tides turn...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio
Where is the Church in that link?
If you know Italian 60s/70s history, all over...
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1633884783/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?...
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1633884783/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?...
Why would China specifically care what the pope has to say? I understand the pope is the one not expressing anything but why would China even pressure him in the first place. I thought China was already prohibiting religion from taking place. So what leverage does China have on the pope?
Catholicism exists and is heavily regulated in China. The CCP (unsurprisingly) appoints the bisbops.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_in_China
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_in_China
"the Chinese government established the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association,[2] which rejects the authority of the Holy See"
What about Jesus? lol
What about Jesus? lol
Every Lutheran christian rejects their authority too.
That's why I find this even funnier.
What is left of the catholic church if you reject the pope?
Protestants
What is left of the catholic church if you reject the pope?
Protestants
> What is left of the catholic church if you reject the pope?
> Protestants
I think you mean “Eastern Orthodox”, as they both were rejecting the primacy (at least, in the terms Catholics define it) of the Pope long before Protestants existed and remain closer to the Roman Catholics on most points other than the primacy of the Pope than Protestants, who reject a lot more about Catholicism than the role of the Pope.
> Protestants
I think you mean “Eastern Orthodox”, as they both were rejecting the primacy (at least, in the terms Catholics define it) of the Pope long before Protestants existed and remain closer to the Roman Catholics on most points other than the primacy of the Pope than Protestants, who reject a lot more about Catholicism than the role of the Pope.
You kid, but I'd say humans disagreeing about what the man (and his boy) in the sky thinks has been the source of millennia of conflict...
Disappointing.
[deleted]
Never bet on the church to defend your rights should be a long acquired wisdom by now.
That's reductive of complex traditions.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asylum_(antiquity)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asylum_(antiquity)
I meant the church, not christianity. The roman catholic church killed christians all over Europe if they didn't accept the official doctrine. What is typical for the church is its behavior to suck up to anyone with influence or power.
Individual priests, nuns, and laity have often been at the forefront of defending people's rights in dictatorships. The organisations' track records have been more checkered.
True, I was more precise in another comment. I meant the roman catholic church specifically, not christians in general. And not all churches of course. When my father died when I was young I got into some financial troubles. The local christian community helped me with direct monetary support, no questions asked. I will certainly not forget that even if I payed them back multiple times by now and don't really believe.
They also have a lot of shelters for homeless and others in need of help in my country without any missionary ambitions (today at least, historically it was for missionary purposes). They help out where the state fails and it fails a lot.
Still the institution of the roman catholic church and christians are not synonymous to me. And any form of criticism is certainly directed at the churches power structures, not at their priests. I think the current pope is quite nice, but I disagree with him here.
They also have a lot of shelters for homeless and others in need of help in my country without any missionary ambitions (today at least, historically it was for missionary purposes). They help out where the state fails and it fails a lot.
Still the institution of the roman catholic church and christians are not synonymous to me. And any form of criticism is certainly directed at the churches power structures, not at their priests. I think the current pope is quite nice, but I disagree with him here.
Like all other multinationals, thirsty enough for access to the Chinese market it’s willing to look the other way
Edit: ya know, this is probably an excellent idea for the church. Every extra Chinese Catholic is someone who will likely ultimately accept the Pope’s authority over the CCP’s, regardless of if there are CCP friendly bishops. Get a big enough beachhead amongst poor Chinese, and bide their time, and they’re probably on to something.
Edit: ya know, this is probably an excellent idea for the church. Every extra Chinese Catholic is someone who will likely ultimately accept the Pope’s authority over the CCP’s, regardless of if there are CCP friendly bishops. Get a big enough beachhead amongst poor Chinese, and bide their time, and they’re probably on to something.
Ironically, exposing the limits of what was claimed to be omnipotence.
Who's claiming omnipotence? Key Christian figures have been murdered since day 0.
>Christian figures have been murdered since day 0
Nah probably more the year 16-26 AD. ;)
Nah probably more the year 16-26 AD. ;)
No religious flamebait on HN, please.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Reminds me of how early Christians cut out the Gospel of Judas.
Nah, if Christianity gets big enough in China to threaten CCP rule, they'll break off from the Pope, form their own branch (sinodoxy?) and fight to be seen as an equal authority. Then they can do things like ban service in anything but Chinese and decree all Bibles must be in Chinese, etc. The only reason it hasn't happened yet is because Christianity is not big enough there.
They already did this, let's how it goes.
> Nah, if Christianity gets big enough in China to threaten CCP rule, they'll break off from the Pope, form their own branch (sinodoxy?)
Already done since 70 years ago.
* Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Patriotic_Catholic_Ass...
> The Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association, abbreviated CPA, CPCA or CCPA, is an organization established in 1957 by the People's Republic of China's Religious Affairs Bureau to supervise mainland China's Catholics. It is the only organizational body of Catholics in China officially recognized by the government of the People's Republic of China, but is not recognized by the Vatican.
> In his encyclical Ad Apostolorum principis of 29 July 1958, Pope Pius XII deplored the attitude and activities of the Association and declared the bishops who participated in consecrating new bishops selected by the Association to be excommunicated. Pope Benedict XVI referred to the agents of the Association as people who, though not ordained priests and sometimes not baptized, "control and take decisions concerning important ecclesial questions, including the appointment of bishops." The organization is overseen by the United Front Work Department of the Communist Party of China following the State Administration for Religious Affairs' absorption into the United Front Work Department in 2018.
* Three-Self Patriotic Movement
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-Self_Patriotic_Movement
> The Three-Self Patriotic Movement is a Protestant organization in the People's Republic of China, and one of the largest Protestant bodies in the world. It is colloquially known as the Three-Self Church.
> In May 1950, Y. T. Wu and other prominent Protestant leaders such as T. C. Chao, Chen Chonggui, and Cora Deng met in Beijing with Zhou Enlai to discuss Protestant Christianity's relationship with the young People's Republic of China. "The Christian Manifesto" was published in July 1950 and its original title was "Direction of Endeavor for Chinese Christianity in the Construction of New China." During the 1950s, 400,000 Protestant Christians publicly endorsed and signed this document.
> The purpose of publishing this document was: to heighten our vigilance against imperialism, to make known the clear political stand of Christians in New China, to hasten the building of a Chinese church whose affairs are managed by the Chinese themselves, and to indicate the responsibilities that should be taken up by Christians throughout the whole country in national reconstruction in New China.
> It further stated the movement promoted the "self-governance, self-support, and self-propagation" of the Chinese church.
Already done since 70 years ago.
* Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Patriotic_Catholic_Ass...
> The Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association, abbreviated CPA, CPCA or CCPA, is an organization established in 1957 by the People's Republic of China's Religious Affairs Bureau to supervise mainland China's Catholics. It is the only organizational body of Catholics in China officially recognized by the government of the People's Republic of China, but is not recognized by the Vatican.
> In his encyclical Ad Apostolorum principis of 29 July 1958, Pope Pius XII deplored the attitude and activities of the Association and declared the bishops who participated in consecrating new bishops selected by the Association to be excommunicated. Pope Benedict XVI referred to the agents of the Association as people who, though not ordained priests and sometimes not baptized, "control and take decisions concerning important ecclesial questions, including the appointment of bishops." The organization is overseen by the United Front Work Department of the Communist Party of China following the State Administration for Religious Affairs' absorption into the United Front Work Department in 2018.
* Three-Self Patriotic Movement
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-Self_Patriotic_Movement
> The Three-Self Patriotic Movement is a Protestant organization in the People's Republic of China, and one of the largest Protestant bodies in the world. It is colloquially known as the Three-Self Church.
> In May 1950, Y. T. Wu and other prominent Protestant leaders such as T. C. Chao, Chen Chonggui, and Cora Deng met in Beijing with Zhou Enlai to discuss Protestant Christianity's relationship with the young People's Republic of China. "The Christian Manifesto" was published in July 1950 and its original title was "Direction of Endeavor for Chinese Christianity in the Construction of New China." During the 1950s, 400,000 Protestant Christians publicly endorsed and signed this document.
> The purpose of publishing this document was: to heighten our vigilance against imperialism, to make known the clear political stand of Christians in New China, to hasten the building of a Chinese church whose affairs are managed by the Chinese themselves, and to indicate the responsibilities that should be taken up by Christians throughout the whole country in national reconstruction in New China.
> It further stated the movement promoted the "self-governance, self-support, and self-propagation" of the Chinese church.
FooBarWidget(4)
morninglight(1)
To quote the Manic Street Preachers:
"And if you tolerate this, then your children will be next"
And in a more serious note, from "First they came.." [1]. It is about the cowardice of German intellectuals and certain clergy (including, by his own admission, Niemöller himself) following the Nazis' rise to power and subsequent incremental purging of their chosen targets, group after group.:
First they came for the Communists - And I did not speak out - Because I was not a Communist
Then they came for the Socialists - And I did not speak out - Because I was not a Socialist
Then they came for the trade unionists - And I did not speak out - Because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for the Jews - And I did not speak out - Because I was not a Jew
Then they came for me - And there was no one left - To speak out for me
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...
"And if you tolerate this, then your children will be next"
And in a more serious note, from "First they came.." [1]. It is about the cowardice of German intellectuals and certain clergy (including, by his own admission, Niemöller himself) following the Nazis' rise to power and subsequent incremental purging of their chosen targets, group after group.:
First they came for the Communists - And I did not speak out - Because I was not a Communist
Then they came for the Socialists - And I did not speak out - Because I was not a Socialist
Then they came for the trade unionists - And I did not speak out - Because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for the Jews - And I did not speak out - Because I was not a Jew
Then they came for me - And there was no one left - To speak out for me
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...
Please keep tedious ideological clichés and boilerplate off HN.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
I predict some troubles with his next reincarnation.
The more pressing issue is that everyone more powerful than the Pope has so far found themselves impotent in the face of the Chinese threat. Trump, Merkel, Modi, Putin etc all too weak to act.
Are you really surprised that putin is not at the forefront of defending human rights in china?
I'm surprised he's not more concerned by Chinese border expansion against India. A nuclear war on his doorstep might affect business, or Russia might be next, or it might invite more US activity in his back yard.
But yeah, I think Putin gave up on internationalism back in the 2000s.
But yeah, I think Putin gave up on internationalism back in the 2000s.
If I was a large, sparsely populated country that shared a border with China, I’d be more than a little worried about Chinese territorial ambitions. If they’re willing to rattle sabres with India over some Godforsaken rocks, imagine what they’d be willing to do for the territorial riches that lie North.
No question it's an issue for the coming decades. China still respects the military capabilities of Russia and their ability to defend their territory. Russia is well ahead of India in capabilities. The question is when or will that respect change and what would change it. Arrogance inevitably gets the better of all superpowers, it can't be more than 10-20 years before China starts openly trying to take Russian border territory.
I also wouldn't want to be Mongolia. There's a potential that China will leave Mongolia intact as a buffer with the long Russian border. If China wants to expand its territory, there's no easier, larger target than Mongolia (17/18th largest nation by land with only 3m people and essentially no military ability to defend itself).
I also wouldn't want to be Mongolia. There's a potential that China will leave Mongolia intact as a buffer with the long Russian border. If China wants to expand its territory, there's no easier, larger target than Mongolia (17/18th largest nation by land with only 3m people and essentially no military ability to defend itself).
> I also wouldn't want to be Mongolia
My (limited) understanding is that Mongolia is mostly steppe, and the Mongolians have several thousand years of claim to the land, neither of which is true of — say — Outer Manchuria. Russia will struggle to get much sympathy if the Chinese execute a “Crimean Gambit” there.
My (limited) understanding is that Mongolia is mostly steppe, and the Mongolians have several thousand years of claim to the land, neither of which is true of — say — Outer Manchuria. Russia will struggle to get much sympathy if the Chinese execute a “Crimean Gambit” there.
CCP has settled 12/14 of her inherited land borders disputes (China being the most bordered nation in the world), including with Russia in the 90s after border skirmish in the 60s. All of which with greater Chinese concessions with exception of Pakistan who gave more to spite Indian. Putin's not worried because CCP has a categorically good record for settling land border. Also Russia is China's backup lifeline for energy products via pipelines and Putin is probably interested to see how far Chinese lawfare methods can go. India/Bhutan is China's the last unsettled land border, India is currently beefing with all her neighbors which is conveniently not reported upon. This South Asian in a Nutshell gif summarizes the situation pretty aptly.
https://www.reddit.com/r/KireMama/duplicates/hda8kq/south_as...
https://www.reddit.com/r/KireMama/duplicates/hda8kq/south_as...
Canada or Australia will be taken over by the Chinese long before Russia needs to worry.
What’s your reasoning here? Russian military strength?
The Chinese people are not mass emmigrating to Russia, yet.
Destabilisation almost anywhere is bread and honey to Putin, it's what he lives on. Anyway that disputed border is 2,000km from the nearest Russian territory, which itself is some remote Siberian backwater. India buys a lot fo Russian military gear, so ka-ching!
Trump is un-necessarily provocative towards China, or is weak on China? Which is it?
You can be both unnecessarily provocative and weak in the same domain. Provocation and effective use of strength aren’t the same thing; just as you can “speak softly and carry a big stick”, so can you do the opposite.
Maybe, but that depends if you think trade action against China, and drawing attention to the increasing oppression of the citizens of Hong Kong, is ineffectual. Do you have any proposals?
[deleted]
I wouldn't immediately associate Trump with rational thought, there may not be an answer here that satisfies.
Right, so somehow he navigated the entrenched political machine of Washington DC to become president, de-escalated and decreased American influence at various war-torn hotspots (this is a whole different debate, but IMHO withdrawing from hotspots that the US has largely helped create is only a good thing), implemented a number of quite successful US business and trade policies, and started healthcare reform in the form of transparent pricing laws, all while being an irrational, despotic lunatic?
Yep. And those that enabled him are just as guilty of putting a guy like that in a position of power. Or did you think he did this all by himself?
In case you missed it, that was a list of the upsides of the Trump presidency. He certainly hasn't done anything like turn 3rd world countries into slave-trading hellhole failed states. Wouldn't want someone like that in a position of power, would we?
"You list a whole pile of things that when looked at slightly differently are net negatives"
Granted, but that's true of almost all of any politician's work. Kinda makes the point that it's not all bad, eh?
"America's reputation in the world" - give me a break. Out here, in the rest of the world, we don't really care. America really isn't (or ever was) the bright shining light the world looks to.
Granted, but that's true of almost all of any politician's work. Kinda makes the point that it's not all bad, eh?
"America's reputation in the world" - give me a break. Out here, in the rest of the world, we don't really care. America really isn't (or ever was) the bright shining light the world looks to.
You list a whole pile of things that when looked at slightly differently are net negatives and claim victory, and as for your last point, there is still a good 6 months to go, I wouldn't put it past him.
Frankly, we all collectively should be downright ashamed of Trump being the leader of the most influential country in the world, the fact that this happened is a terrible strike against this particular form of democracy. The damage done will take decades to repair, and likely America's reputation in the world will never recover to the point that it was at before Trump pulled his coup of the Republican party.
Frankly, we all collectively should be downright ashamed of Trump being the leader of the most influential country in the world, the fact that this happened is a terrible strike against this particular form of democracy. The damage done will take decades to repair, and likely America's reputation in the world will never recover to the point that it was at before Trump pulled his coup of the Republican party.
I guess freedom truly has a price. Good to know...
The world needs people like Muhammad Ali who were willing to risk financial gain for justice.
The current world is full of celebrity hypocrites, e.g. Lebron James, Kaepernick, Steve Kerr, Merkel, Trump, and now even the Pope...
Such a transparent scam. It's like Disney removing black actor in the Chinese Star Wars poster, while lecturing the US audience on racial justice: https://www.cnn.com/2015/12/08/asia/star-wars-china-racist-p..., or LeBron James carrying water for the Chinese when discussing Hong Kong.
On human terms it makes no sense to continue church operations in china just like some companies pulling out of china, but the church has not run on those terms.
For centuries the church and her members in China struggled to maintain their identity in the face of discrimination, and there has been progress even though small. I don't think it makes sense to let go of a winning strategy albeit a slow one given the conditions.