Next, the encyclical deplores the tendency to
undermine the authority of the Magisterium: "As a first measure, they are
not afraid to limit the authority of the supreme Magisterium of the Church at
their discretion, saying that there are issues such as social and economic issues
in which Catholics would be lawful ignore the doctrinal teachings and the norms
given by the Holy Apostolic See. Opinion -in reality, it seems to confirm it-
absolutely false and full of error, because -as we had the opportunity to
expose a few years ago to a select assembly of Venerable Brothers in the
Episcopate- "the power of the Church is not circumscribed to the domain of
strictly religious things', as is often said, plus the entire field of natural
law, its teaching, interpretation and application, as regards its moral
foundation, belongs to it. Indeed, By divine disposition, the observance of the
natural law refers to the path by which man must tend towards his supernatural
end. Now, the Church is, on this path, guide and guardian of men, insofar as it
is related to its supernatural end.
Likewise, Pius XII disapproves of the procedure that consists in choosing the matters on which we must obey: «Those who, after having arbitrarily decreed and proclaimed this narrow limitation, and even if they declare by word of mouth that they want to obey the Roman Pontiff in the truths of faith and -as they are used to expressing themselves- in the ecclesiastical norms that must be observed, they go so far as to dare to deny obedience to clear and precise measures and provisions of the Holy See, attributing to them secondary imaginary purposes of a political order, as if they were dark machinations directed against the nation itself."
The incident of the consecration Pius XII immediately addresses the theme of the recently accomplished act: the consecration of the two Franciscan priests. "Despite the explicit and severe admonition of the Holy See to those concerned, it has had the audacity to confer, on some ecclesiastics, episcopal consecration."
Pius XII refuses to approve the act committed that transgresses an intangible law:
«In the presence of such serious attacks against the discipline and unity of the Church, it is our precise duty to remind everyone that very different are the doctrine and principles that govern the constitution of the Society that, with divine power, Jesus Christ Our Lord founded.». These consecrations challenged the discipline, unity, and constitution of the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ.
«From this it follows that, bishops who have not been appointed or confirmed by the Holy See, even more, chosen and consecrated against its explicit provisions, will not be able to enjoy any power of teaching or jurisdiction; since jurisdiction is given to the bishops solely through the mediation of the Roman Pontiff»14.
What are the consequences? «The acts that belong to the power of the sacred Order, carried out by said ecclesiastics, even if they are valid -assuming that the consecration that they want to be conferred has been valid- are seriously illegal, that is, sinful and sacrilegious. The words of admonition pronounced by the Divine Master are very appropriate: "Whoever does not enter the fold by the door, but goes up by another way, he is a thief and a murderer” »15.
But is there not evidence in history in favor of the legitimacy of such consecrations? «We well know that these rebels, to legitimize the offices that, unfortunately, they have usurped, appeal to the practice followed in past centuries; but everyone sees very well that ecclesiastical discipline would gradually collapse if, in one matter or another, it were lawful for anyone to abide by provisions that are no longer in force, since the supreme ecclesiastical authority has long ago determined differently.
Furthermore, the very fact of appealing to a different discipline, far from excusing their conduct, is proof of their willingness to deliberately evade the current discipline and that they are obliged to follow: a discipline that is valid not only for China and for the recently established territories. evangelized, but for the whole Church".
Severe penalties are inflicted on those who violate this law: «Because of an abusive consecration, which constitutes a very serious attack on the unity of the Church, the excommunication officially reserved to the Apostolic See has been established, which is incurred ipso facto, not only who receives the arbitrary consecration, but who confers it »16.
Finally, the most sincere pretext that the guilty party alleged was his situation of extreme need. However, Pius XII rules it out: "The spiritual benefit of the faithful is not provided for in violation of the laws of the Church."
AFTER THE MATTER OF THE CONSECRATIONS
Reception of the encyclical by the recipients How did the clergy and faithful to whom it was addressed receive the encyclical? The reactions were diverse: they ranged from filial obedience to rebellion. However, the majority declared themselves doubly misunderstood: misunderstood in their intentions: they wanted to remain faithful to Rome without the slightest intention of schism; and misunderstood regarding the emergency situation whose seriousness, according to them, was being underestimated by the Holy See. They did not dismiss the Pope, they were only convinced that the situation of Catholicism in China was unknown to him in all its magnitude.
According to some, the excommunication had been very severe. And, on the other hand, did it really apply to his situation? “They did not question the fairness of the law or its reasonableness, they only considered it inapplicable in their particular situation. [...] It should be added that there is evidence that the decision to consecrate or be consecrated was, to a great extent, a decision made with fear and regret, but that it was considered a painful necessity»17.
Pius XII did not approve of this attitude towards Church law. Shortly after Ad Apostolorum Principis, in an encyclical addressed to the entire world, he issued a bitter lament about the situation of the spirit of the Chinese of the Patriotic Church: «It is with pain that we sometimes see the rights of the Church, to which it is the responsibility, trampled on. elect and consecrate by a mandate from the Holy See the bishops destined to legitimately govern the Christian people; and this happens to the serious detriment of the faithful, as if the Catholic Church were a thing of a single nation and dependent on civil authority and not a divine institution destined to welcome all peoples»18.
the underground church
The faithful and the Chinese clergy who remained obedient to Rome suffered from suffocating surveillance. Although the underground Church had been active for several years, it then became a true organized society reminiscent of that of the refractory priests of the French Revolution. A network of catechists, schools and even clandestine religious communities was formed.
During the Cultural Revolution 19, the arrests became even more numerous, the last bishops were torn from their flocks and were imprisoned or killed, often after inhumane torture.
At the end of said revolution (1979), a slightly cooler air was seen. Indeed, a number of priests and bishops who survived imprisonment and torture were released, but only to undergo a kind of house arrest. The bishop was permanently accompanied in his house by a Party agent. If a man entered the house, the agent followed him around to make sure the bishop did not perform a clandestine ordination.
Starting in that same year, 1979, the lay faithful found themselves subjected to a new type of persecution: the one-child policy. At the risk of severe reprisals, Catholic families managed to bring multiple children into the world. These so-called "black children" were and still are deprived of medical coverage, of formal employment, in short: of any legal existence. Monsignor Fan, Bishop of Báoding: a typical case Among the large number of bishops, priests and faithful who were imprisoned during the Cultural Revolution, Monsignor Pedro José Fan Xueyan, Bishop of Báoding, stood out for the unwavering firmness of his faith, as well as as for the long years of torture and prison suffered.
Monsignor Fan was named bishop by Pius XII and consecrated in 1951. He was imprisoned twice during the Cultural Revolution.
He was briefly free when, in April 1982, he was arrested for the third time and sentenced to ten years in prison for "having illegally exercised his ecclesiastical authority by ordaining priests." Five and a half years later, on November 17, 1987, he was transferred from prison to his home, where he was kept under house arrest. He was only allowed to visit his close relatives.
In 1987, a statement by Monsignor Fan was published, in the form of a thirteen-question interview. These are two of those questions:
«P. 2: Is it normal that you yourselves choose and ordain the clergy?
» A.: There are two ways to answer this question. First of all, before, in China, we did not have our own missionaries. The Pope sent all the missionaries to us from other countries, so it was impossible for us to choose and ordain the clergy ourselves.
» After a long time, we began to have our own missionaries and our own bishops. Therefore, it was already possible for us to ordain our own priests and consecrate our own bishops. However, we needed the permission of the Pope to consecrate a bishop. This is how it is all over the world and no exception is made in any country.
» Secondly, the Patriotic Association cannot elect or order, since it has broken ties with the Pope and does not submit to his authority. However, if the Patriotic Association had limited itself to transgressing the law with the consecration of bishops, this would already constitute an act of rebellion against the Pope and against Jesus.
» Q. 6: Some elderly priests who have not joined the reform or followed the line of the Patriotic Association are not linked to any bishop. Is this a correct way to act?
» A.: It is correct if the previous bishop no longer lives and if they could no longer find a new bishop. In such circumstances, his acts are in accordance with the legislation of the Church »20.
--------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------
Address to the Sacred College and the Episcopate, November 2, 1954; cf. AAS 46 (1954), 671-672.
13. John Tong, The Churchjrom 1949 to 1990, in The Catholic Church in Modern China (E. Tang & J.-P. Wieát), Wipf & Stock, 2013, pp. 13 & 14.
14. On the subject of episcopal jurisdiction, it is important to highlight what Pius VI said: «To the other bishops [other than the Pope] it is necessary that each one be assigned a particular portion of the flock, not by divine right, but by ecclesiastical right; not through the mouth of Christ, but through the hierarchical order, so that he can display, over this limited portion, the ordinary power of government». Brief Supersoliditate, November 28, 1786, §16.
The passage that we underline suggests that the legitimately consecrated bishop already possesses, from before a portion of the Church is assigned to him, a power to govern, which is carried out upon receiving jurisdiction over said portion.
15. Pope Innocent III declares that this illegality also extends to acts committed by priests who have been ordained by an illegitimate bishop: «No matter how honest, religious, holy and prudent one may be, he cannot and must not consecrate the Eucharist or celebrate the sacrifice of the altar if he is not a priest, fully ordained by a visible and tangible bishop. [...] [It is necessary that he be] a presbyter properly constituted for that office by the bishop ». Letter Eius example, D 424.
16. Cf. Decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, April 9, 1951; AAS 43 (1951), 217. — This decree to which Pius XII refers aggravates the penalty for those who consecrate and for those who receive consecration without a papal mandate. A commentary on this decree states: «Such an act, in fact, is not a violation of a purely ecclesiastical law, but, even apart from a schismatic attitude, it entails a disdain for ecclesiastical authority and cannot but cause serious damage. public to the souls of the faithful» (Nouvelle revue theologique, July 1951, p. 751).
17. Geoffrey King, A Schismatic Church? - A Canonical Evaluation, in The Catholic Church in Modern China (E. Tang &J.-P. Wieát), Wipf & Stock, 2013.
Encyclical Meminisse iuvat, July 14, 1958, AAS 50 (1958), 453
18. Regarding schismatic Russia and following Father Theiner, Louis Veuillot said (L'Église schismatique russe, in Mélanges, ie series, Louis Vives, 1876, III, 399): «In Russia there are still characters we call bishops, but there is no episcopate anymore». The same can be said from now on about the Chinese Patriotic Church: In official China there are still characters we call bishops, but there is no episcopate anymore.
19. The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution was a new stage of Chinese communist terror. Launched by Mao in 1966 to combat the "four winds" (old ideas, customs, morality and culture), it was the cause of new purges within the "intellectuals".
20. Thirteen Points in. The Catholic Church in
Modernt China (E. Tang & J.-P. Wieát), Wipf & Stock, 2013, pp.
142&s.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario