Posted on 12/06/2019 8:58:22 PM PST by ebb tide
On December 3 “New Bloom,” an online magazine based in Taiwan, published an extensive interview with Cardinal Joseph Zen Zekiun, bishop emeritus of Hong Kong.
The interview took place in Hong Kong and bears the byline of Nicholas Haggerty. It can be read in its entirety in English on this page of “New Blooom”:
> Interview: Cardinal Joseph Zen
The cardinal reviews with a richness of detail the Holy See’s policy toward China during the last three pontificates. And he identifies those mainly responsible for the surrender to the communist regime, ratified with the secret accord of September 22 2018, in Indian cardinal Ivan Dias, penultimate prefect of “Propaganda Fide,” and above all in cardinal secretary of state Pietro Parolin, previously the undersecretary charged with the China portfolio.
The following is the part of the interview that concerns the pontificate of Francis.
*
ZEN: Francis has low respect for his predecessors. He is shutting down everything done by John Paul II and by Pope Benedict. And obviously they always give lip service, they always say: “In the continuity…” but that’s an insult. An insult. Not in the continuity.
In the year 2010, Parolin and Dias agreed with the Chinese part on a draft. And so everybody started saying: “Oh, now an agreement is coming, it’s coming, it’s coming.” All of a sudden, no more voice.
I have no evidence, but I believe that it was Pope Benedict who said no. He could not sign that agreement. And I think the one agreement signed now must be exactly that one, which Pope Benedict refused to sign.
HAGGERTY: You haven’t seen this agreement, they haven’t shown this to you?
ZEN: No! I ask you, if that’s fair. I am one of the two living Chinese Cardinals and I cannot have a view of that agreement, and I’ve been three times to Rome.
HAGGERTY: How was your relationship with Francis at the beginning of his Pontificate? Was it always strained?
ZEN: With Francis, personally wonderful relations. Even now. At the beginning of July this year, I had supper with the Pope. But he doesn’t answer my letters. And everything that happened is against what I suggested.
There are three things. A secret agreement, being so secret you can’t say anything. We don’t know what is in it. Then the legitimization of the seven excommunicated bishops. That’s incredible, simply incredible. But even more incredible is the last act: the killing of the underground [Church].
Now they finished their job. On the 28th of June, a document came out from the Holy See—the Holy See. Never had a document come out from the Holy See, always from a particular department, with the signatures. This had no department specified and no signature—from the Holy See. Incredible. Incredible. Somebody doesn’t dare to take responsibility.
I went to Rome again. For the third time. I went in January last year, October last year, and then June this year. I sent a letter to the papal residence, saying: “Holy Father, I am here in Rome. I would like to know who drafted that document. The so-called pastoral orientation. And I want to discuss with him on that document in your presence. I am here in Rome for four days, you can call me anytime, day or night.”
After one day, nothing. So I sent another note, but this time with all of my objections to the document. I said: “I’m still here waiting.” So after another day, somebody came to say: “The Holy Father said, whatever you have to say, say to the Secretary of State, Cardinal Parolin.” I was furious.
I said: “No! I would never waste time with that fellow.” A real waste of time, because I would never convince him, he would never convince me. I would like the Holy Father to be present. But since that seems impossible, okay, I’ll go home empty-handed.
The last day I went around to pray in some Basilica and to visit some friends. […] I came back to the house there at five o’clock. They said, “Oh, the Holy Father invites you to supper together with Parolin.”
I went there to the supper. Very simple, the three of us. I thought supper is not a time to quarrel, so I had to be kind during supper. So I talked all about Hong Kong, and Parolin didn’t say a word. So at the end, I said, “Holy Father, what about my objections to that document?” He said, “Oh, oh, I’m going to look into the matter.” He saw me off at the door.
And then, I did not come back empty-handed. I have a clear impression that Parolin is manipulating the Holy Father.
HAGGERTY: What does Parolin want?
ZEN: Oh, nobody can be sure, because it’s a real mystery how a man of the Church, given all his knowledge of China, of the Communists, could do such a thing as he’s doing now? The only explanation is not faith. It’s a diplomatic success. Vainglory.
Now this last act is simply incredible. The document says: “To minister openly, you need to register with the government.” And then you have to sign. To sign something in which it says that you have to support the independent church. […] The document contains something against our orthodoxy and they are encouraged to sign. You cannot cheat yourself. You cannot cheat the Communists. You are cheating the whole world. You are cheating the faithful. To sign the document is not to sign a declaration. When you sign, you accept to be a member of that church under the leadership of the communist party. So terrible, terrible.
Recently I learned that the Holy Father, on a flight back from (I don’t remember where) said, “Sure, I don’t want to see a schism. But I’m not afraid of a schism.” And I’m going to tell him: “You are encouraging a schism. You are legitimizing the schismatic church in China.” Incredible.
Ping
All part of the plan.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.