|
作者
|
內容
|
|
Grange
|
Posted -
2006/5/11 下午 10:33:59
|
|
|
From Apply Daily again!
戴耀廷 香港大學法律學院副教授
職業特工隊的美麗華裔女特工駕那部由中國生產的翻版法拉利跑車(Grange註:好似林寶堅尼而不是法拉利)，駛進了梵蒂岡進行一項秘密任務。女特工耳機傳來隊友緊張的 聲音：「你的位置在那？為甚麼還未在梵蒂岡的指定位置出現。」女特工非常詫異地回答：「我早已到達指定位置了。」隊友非常不耐煩地叫嚷：「我們都已在梵蒂岡各就各位了，為何你還不出現？」女特工慌忙跳出跑車，竟然發覺自己原來駛進了一個由中國某官方機構在上海搭建的翻版梵蒂岡。這一次秘密任務當然失敗了。
愛國會是冒牌貨
教宗本篤十六世最近強烈譴責中國天主教愛國會自行按立兩位中國教區主教，是嚴重 違反宗教自由。梵蒂岡教廷其實可以把這事件視為侵犯版權的問題。天主教愛國會其實是一個冒牌貨，冒充了正牌的羅馬天主教。所以事件可以視為在中國出產的另一種冒牌貨，是一種宗教的冒牌貨，與那部冒牌法拉利跑車一樣。
但也可能還有一點不同，中國人在中國還是可以買到正牌法拉利跑車，但中國人在中國卻不可以合法地信奉正牌的天主教。很諷刺地，要用正貨天主教，中國人就得走到地下，翻版貨反而可以堂而皇之公開展銷。最近胡錦濤主席到美國訪問，會見了微軟的蓋茲，更簽下十多億合約買下微軟的正版軟件。正版的電腦軟件可以從外國買入，但正版的宗教卻不容許從外國引入。
正牌宗教在地下
羅馬天主教的特點是它只此一家，別無分店。故只有梵蒂岡品牌的天主教才是正版的天主教，其他一切的都是翻版。基督教教會並沒有所謂的唯一正統，可以有不同品牌。因此中國就發展出自己的中國品牌基督教教會，不致出現翻版的基督教教會。但其他的基督教教會品牌也與羅馬天主教教會一樣，不能進入中國的市場。結果是那些較具國際品牌地位的基督教教會品牌，也同樣要在中國走到地下去。同樣是荒謬的結果，正牌的宗教品牌都只能在黑市中見到。
欲壟斷宗教市場
因此教宗本篤十六世指摘這是違反宗教自由可能是對的，但問題不是天主教愛國會未經梵蒂岡教廷認可就按立主教，更根本的是中國政府要壟斷宗教市場，不容國際的宗教組織自由進入中國，以翻版貨或自己的宗教品牌充斥宗教市場。
中國人在沒有宗教自由下只有兩個選擇，一是選用翻版宗教或次質宗教，一是到地下市場去尋索他們的心靈平安。我們要問，為何電腦軟件一定要用正版，宗教反而不可以？
|
|
Jedi
|
Posted -
2006/5/11 下午 10:58:39
|
|
|
精釆!
|
|
Jedi
|
Posted -
2006/5/11 下午 11:08:55
|
|
|
有時我不禁wonder為何中國不去裂教呢？像英國瀟瀟灑灑、堂而皇之地立自己的國教，可以叫Chinese Communist Church，便免去了Vatican的指手劃腳，更可尊黨領導為leader of the Church，念自創的信經：我信毛主席，全能的舵手，天地萬物...我信聖而公的共產黨...
你又能如何？
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2006/5/11 下午 11:55:18
|
|
|
Jedi,
The Chinese "Catholics" Church under the CPA has, de facto, been declared schismatic (no longer Roman Catholics, they may call themselves Chinese catholics) by Pope PIus XII:
"they [some men] are striving by every means in their power to establish among you a 'national' Church, as they call it; and this Church, if it should come into being, would no longer be Catholic."
(Pope Pius XII - Ad Sinarum Gentem, Oct. 7, 1954).
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2006/5/11 下午 11:57:11
|
|
|
I. IS THE CHINESE CATHOLIC PATRIOTIC ASSOCIATION A SCHISMATIC CHURCH?
Is the CPA schismatic in China?
1. Founding: The Chinese government established its own “Catholic Patriotic Association” in 1957 as a substitute for the Roman Catholic Church in order to sever Roman Catholics in China from fidelity to the Successor of Peter and from any teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the Chinese government considers to be contrary to its own interests. Its basic principle is autonomy from the Pope’s administrative, legislative and judicial authority.
2. Pope Pius XII’s position – No Longer Catholic: Approximately three years before the establishment of the CPA, Pope Pius XII wrote with great foresight on the subject of autonomy in his encyclical Ad Sinarum Gentem in October 1954:
“22. The promoters of such movements (Three Autonomies) with the greatest cunning seek to deceive the simple or the timid, or to draw them away from the right path. For this purpose they falsely affirm that the only true patriots are those who adhere to the church thought up by them, that is, to that which has the “Three Autonomies.” But in reality they seek, in a word, to establish finally among you a “national” church, which no longer could be Catholic because it would be the negation of that universality or rather “catholicity” by which the society truly founded by Jesus Christ is above all nations and embraces them one and all.”
3. Ordination of CPA Bishops and Pope Pius XII’s declaration – Invalid and Illicit: The first CPA bishop was ordained in 1958 without a mandate from the Holy See. On June 29, 1958, after condemning the CPA, Pope Pius XII declared the election of CPA bishops invalid and their consecrations illicit, that is, “criminal and sacrilegious,” in his Ad Apostolorum Principis:
“41. Acts requiring the power of Holy Orders which are performed by ecclesiastics of this kind [“bishops who have been neither named nor confirmed by the Apostolic See” cf. n. 39] , though they are valid as long as the consecration conferred on them was valid, are yet gravely illicit, that is, criminal and sacrilegious.
47. From what We have said, it follows that no authority whatsoever, save that which is proper to the Supreme Pastor, can render void the canonical appointment granted to any bishop; that no person or group, whether of priests or of laymen, can claim the right of nominating bishops; that no one can lawfully confer episcopal consecration unless he has received the mandate of the Apostolic See.
48. Consequently, if consecration of this kind is being done contrary to all right and law, and by this crime the unity of the Church is being seriously attacked, an excommunication reserved specialissimo modo to the Apostolic See has been established which is automatically incurred by the consecrator and by anyone who has received consecration irresponsibly conferred.”
4. Pope John XXIII’s Confirmation – Condemned Once Again: One year later on June 29, 1959, in his encyclical Ad Petram Cathedri, Pope John XXIII recalled and renewed his predecessor’s condemnations:
“131. All, therefore, who wish to remain Christians must be aware of their serious obligation to avoid those false principles, which Our predecessors--especially Popes Pius XI and Pius XII--have condemned in the past, and which We condemn once again.”
5. Continuous Ordination of CPA Bishops Without Mandate: To this day, however, the Chinese government continues to carry out its own independent appointment and ordination of bishops for the CPA. In fact, the CPA has ordained approximately 90 bishops in the past 42 years without the mandate from the Holy See.
6. What is Schism?: According to The Code of Canon Law of the Roman Catholic Church, Canon 751 states that schism is “the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.”
7. Is the CPA Catholic? In September 1988, the Holy See, through the Sacred Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, issued a China Advisory (Prot. 3314/88) to the world’s bishops concerning contacts with the Catholic Church in China. (Hereafter, the Holy See 1988 directive). The prologue of this document states:
“As the contacts among members of the Episcopate, priests and faithful, with exponents of the Catholic Church in China are becoming ever more frequent, this Dicastery, in accord with the Council for the Public Affairs of the Church, considers it opportune to give the Episcopal Conferences the following indications:
1. The contacts in question could be a good occasion to reaffirm with clarity the Catholic Doctrine on the communion which must unite the Bishops with the Successor of Peter and, through him, among themselves (Lumen Gentium, 14 and 18). In this regard, one could have recourse to the doctrinal principles of the Vatican Councils I and II.”
Pope John Paul II repeated this position in a letter to the Chinese faithful in September 1994:
“I am especially close to those who have remained faithful to Jesus Christ and to His Church in the midst of difficulties of all kinds, and continue to testify, even at the cost of deep and prolonged suffering, that the principle of communion with the Successor of Peter... cannot be renounced by a Catholic who desires to remain such and to be recognized as such.”
In January 1995 Pope John Paul II had insisted that:
“A Catholic who wishes to remain such and to be recognized as such cannot reject the principle of communion with the Successor of Peter.”
On December 3, 1996, during a Mass for China marking the feast of St. Francis Xavier, the Pope called on Catholics in China
“All Chinese Catholics are called to remain loyal to the faith received and passed on, and not to yield to models of a Church which do not correspond to the will of the Lord Jesus, to the Catholic faith, or to the feelings and convictions of the great majority of Chinese Catholics.”
Pope John Paul II was clearly referring the “models” to the CPA.
In essence, the Pontiff was saying that as long as the CPA denied the supreme administrative, legislative, and judicial authority of the Successor of Peter, it could not be considered as belonging to the Roman Catholic Church. The CPA is not and cannot be Catholic because it continues to deny the above-mentioned supreme authority of the Successor of Peter. This is also in line with Pope Pius XII’s position as stated in the second paragraph of this section above.
8. Observations by Members of the Roman Catholic Church Hierarchy: Having been notified about the ordination of five bishops by China’s CPA on January 6, 2000, Cardinal Ignatius Kung, the exiled Bishop of Shanghai, reacted immediately in the United States: “The Patriotic Association is a schismatic Church.”
On Jan. 7, 2000, Cardinal Vincenzo Fagiolo, honorary president of the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts, at a conference in Palermo, Italy, described China’s move to ordain the five bishops as a “de facto schism.”
9. Conclusion: In the light of the overwhelming evidence reflected above, we believe that the CPA is not Catholic and is indeed in schism.
10. Holy See’s Position: The Holy See has never formally declared that the CPA is in schism, albeit the CPA has refused for the last 42 years to submit to the Roman Pontiff and has also refused for the last 42 years to be in communion with the members of the Church subject to him.
11. We do not understand your silence on this issue and need your unequivocal answer: Why has the Holy See not declared the CPA to be in schism? Recently, in response to questions about Maryknoll’s support of the CPA, Maryknoll Father Leo B. Shea wrote: “Catholics are united. There is no schismatic Church in China.” Why are so many Roman Catholic leaders advocating that the CPA and the underground Roman Catholic Church in China are the same Church - and without any explanation from the Holy See to attempt to resolve this apparent contradiction?
|
|
kp
|
Posted -
2006/5/12 下午 02:53:22
|
|
|
Augustine,
Thanks for your information.
But I think we need to clarify that the open letter you quoted above is written by Joseph M.C Kung and is not written by the late His Eminence Ignatius Cardinal Kung Pin-Mei (Gong).
Mr. Joseph Kung is the president of the Cardinal Kung foundation and if I am correct , he is the nephew of the late Cardinal Kung.
Although the letter contains many of the facts in the chinese churh today, yet it CANNOT be regarded as an official position of Vatican on the matter.
Afterall, this is a crucial moment in the Sino-Vatican relationship talk, and we would not want to mis-lead anyone on the official church position, don't we?
The church in china is our dear brothers and sisters and our Mother Church would love to re-connect our ties with them.
I think this is a better representation of the Vatican's position on the matter now.
|
|
life
|
Posted -
2006/5/13 下午 06:42:28
|
|
|
内地政府的做法是很幼稚的,的确是在粗暴干涉宗教自由.既然非得建立一个忠于共产党的宗教,那何必打着天主教的旗号?这不是挂羊头卖狗肉?可耻至极!
|
|
