Catholic Church versus China

Okay, the CCP is a democracy and Hong Kong is just another organization with voluntary membership.

I was hoping to gain some insight into why non-Catholics seem to have so many misconceptions about the Catholic Church but I’ll just leave it at that.

Seems to me you have a perfect chance to correct these misconceptions, if you’re so inclined, and able.

Internally at least, the CCP has more democratic institutions than the Catholic Church. Within the CCP, a majority of positions (including membership to various committees/congresses) are validated by vote. My understanding was that the only “elected” position within the Catholic Church was that of the Papacy itself. The CCP ain’t much of a democracy by Western standards, but my only point was that it was more democratic than the Catholic Church. Isn’t it?

And as far as whether Hong Kong has “voluntary membership”… I’m still confused what point you were hoping to make by bringing it up in the first place. What does “voluntary” membership in the Catholic Church have anything to do with the questions of:

  • whether the Catholic church is a political as well as religious organization;
  • whether the Catholic church is hypocritical when it delves into issues of freedom of religion + political practice?

Democracy is an overhyped American concept, and whatsoever political structure the Vatican has cannot be logically described by that American ideal. Protestants rant at the Catholic Church and its hierarchy because they are mostly American, so Catholicism goes against their ideals.
The issue here is that the Pope is the shepherd who tended his sheep in China, nurtured them and gave them hope against the communists who persecuted those who practice religion. And i repeat – PERSECUTE THOSE WHO PRACTICE RELIGION. Now, there’s your democracy in China. It’s cozy in Hong Kong that is why you tend to praise the Chinese “democracy”. Why don’t you try residing in Beijing then?

The Catholic Church is certainly a political organisation. All organisations are political by definition in that they stake out a position and a claim in human society. Archbishop Desmond Tutu, an Anglican, once said “When people say the church should not get involved in politics I don’t know what bible they’re reading”.

That the Church has been and could be hypocritical or even plain wrong in matters of religous or political freedom is quite true too and admitted by all reasonable Catholics. Catholics believe it to be divinely inspired and guided but nonetheless led by human beings. All humans are political in that they are involved in human society and all humans are capable of hypocrisy and wrongdoing. These are not the questions, the question is what is right or wrong in any given situation and that depends largely on the ethics and credo of the questioner. The debate over the role of the Catholic church in China is an age old one, Henry VIII, Frederick Barbarossa, Phillip the Fair, any amount of Latin American juntas all demanded some measure of control over the church and often the appointment of bishops. Even Lee Kuan Yew in the 80s imprisoned some Catholic activists for daring to address social issues his government had ignored and demanded of the vatican " an archbishop I can work with."
It seems curious that it is virtually always authoritarian regimes who do this and not liberal democracies who seem unconcerned by the role of the church and the vatican.

Incidentally, there are many democratic or consultative structures in The Catholic church. Most religous congregations (orders) elect their superiors. Probably the most democratic is the Order of Preachers ( Dominicans) who elect all local and international superiors who only exercise office for a limited time. Bishops are appointed by the pope but only after consultation with the local clergy in most instances, they are rarely imposed. Most parishes in most countries have consultative bodies of local lay people who are certainly taken seriously. It is not populist nor is it democratic in the general sense of the word nor does it advertise itself as such. There is no reason why it should be. Most Companies are not democratic but they can make donations to political parties and support democracy.

Well, in case you guys didn’t read the same bible I did, and didn’t read the same history books I did, saying that religion is out of politics is just a non-sence. First, even if you are american, just read my lips “God bless America and no one else”… does this sound political enough? Also, the bible is so politically correct, that most of it was adapted to be able to adopted by the Roman Empire (and anyone who tells me that there is a chance that in a Roman city jews control the market, is completelly crazy or are reading the wrong books).

And, paraphrazing my boss, “The two oldest companies in the world are the Church and the Mafia, and they are both Italians”.

More than being political, the church is pure and simple biz. The fact that priests cannot get married is to avoid the depiction of the capital they hold (no marriage means no kids, which means no heritage). Also, and if you have read the book correctly, Church invented the paper money (aka indulgences) because they didn’t have enough money for their “wellfare” (in parts of Europe this was true, because hospitals and wellfare where all supported by the Church (like the S. Bernardins in the Alps)).
Other than that, a visit to any church in Europe (specially in the southern Europe where the Catholics where proiminent) and you will see where the money is.
Although many people consider the Catholic Church the responsible for many attrocities, they are also responsible for many advances in technology and maths, for the institution of universities and many other things.

But the most basic problem of China is the fact that the government only allows catholic in aproved churches (and if you say that the CCP is above god). That is completelly against the beliefs of the Catholic Church itself. It is like someone changing the Holy creed to:

“Our Father which art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy name of Mao.
Thy government come.
Thy will be done in earth,
as it is in heaven.”

Would you consider this correct? Another thing is that the Catholic Church was allways a refugee for the abused and the poor, and many of their priests died fighting for them. In China, however, you have to be “patriotic” above anything else, so helping those who are abused is completelly out of question.
And let us not forget another big and extremelly “political” association that is banned in the PRC - The Boy Scouts Association.

[quote=“quickwolf”]Democracy is an overhyped American concept, and whatsoever political structure the Vatican has cannot be logically described by that American ideal. Protestants rant at the Catholic Church and its hierarchy because they are mostly American, so Catholicism goes against their ideals.
[/quote]

  1. Democracy is a Greek concept (the word itself is Greek) going back 2,000 years before America.

  2. Most Protestants are non-Americans. Protestants fought many wars with Catholics in Europe centuries before there was a U.S. Besides, there are many Catholics in America. Most Protestants rail against Catholics because they are Protestants, not because they are Americans - I mean, the Ulster Orange would be pretty pissed off if you call them Americans.

[quote=“wraith”]
It seems curious that it is virtually always authoritarian regimes who do this and not liberal democracies who seem unconcerned by the role of the church and the vatican.[/quote]
Of course, within the scope of a “liberal democracy”, the Vatican is just competing for mind-share like every other philosophy out there. Most liberal democracies also tolerate militant Islam, so of course they’re going to allow the Catholic Church.

This doesn’t mean this type of clash with international religious orders don’t exist in a liberal democracy… note the threatened schism of the Anglican church due to American liberal attitudes towards homosexuality.

The PRC is probably mindful of what happened to the Communist Party in the USSR: Pope viewed as catalyst in fall of communism

“We know what the pope has achieved. Fifty percent of the collapse of communism is his doing. More than one year after he spoke these words, we were able to organize 10 million people for strikes, protests and negotiations. Earlier we tried, I tried, and we couldn’t do it. These are facts. Of course, communism would have fallen, but much later and in a bloody way. He was a gift from the heavens to us.”
– Lech Walesa,

Im really rather puzzled your post cctang, although in a sense it seems we agree. My point was that authoritarian regimes, e.g PRC, can’t stand to have any challenge to their world view and therefore the Catholic church, falun Gong whatever are not to be tolerated whereas Liberal democracies permit free practice of beliefs by organisations that do not practically cause civic unrest though their philosophies may not necessarily agree with the customs of the nation. In this we seem to be in accord.

Your point about the Anglican church rather mystifies me however. In the first place the liberal attitude to homosexuality ( with which I might say i agree) is not an international issue alone. There are plenty within the American Episcopal Church who resist it. I can only echo Vice-President Cheney’s words " freedom means freedom for everyone…to make any arrangements they want". Hmm…liberalism has strange bedfellows…what really IS your point?

[quote=“Marvin”]Two authoritarian governments. To me (an atheist), neither one is necessarily better than the other.

However, if I had to choose between living in a communist country or a Catholic one (or any religions, if it is not a secular country), I would pick the communists any day.

By the way, as much as I believe in freedom of religion, I greatly enjoy China’s atheism.[/quote]

Thats practically saying that if you have a choice between living in a communist country or America, you’d prefer communists anyday. haha.

[quote=“ShrimpCrackers”][quote=“Marvin”]Two authoritarian governments. To me (an atheist), neither one is necessarily better than the other.

However, if I had to choose between living in a communist country or a Catholic one (or any religions, if it is not a secular country), I would pick the communists any day.

By the way, as much as I believe in freedom of religion, I greatly enjoy China’s atheism.[/quote]

Thats practically saying that if you have a choice between living in a communist country or America, you’d prefer communists anyday. haha.[/quote]

Well, what can I say… when you don’t read people’s posts before replying.

[quote=“spook”]The PRC is probably mindful of what happened to the Communist Party in the USSR: Pope viewed as catalyst in fall of communism

“We know what the Pope has achieved. Fifty percent of the collapse of communism is his doing. More than one year after he spoke these words, we were able to organize 10 million people for strikes, protests and negotiations. Earlier we tried, I tried, and we couldn’t do it. These are facts. Of course, communism would have fallen, but much later and in a bloody way. He was a gift from the heavens to us.”
– Lech Walesa,[/quote]

People might also want to do a search on the following words
“The Pope” and “Hitler” and “the Holocaust”

No doubt there’s some skeletons in the closet there. The list of failings of Popes and other members of the Catholic clergy is a mile long, stretching back to Peter who denied he even knew Jesus while he was in the midst of being tortured and executed for crimes he didn’t commit. That list includes murder, pedophilia, anti-semitism, theft and every other sin known to mankind.

If the Catholic Church were only composed of the people who make it up, it should have been shut down long ago. Somehow though it’s managed to survive to the point of being one of the oldest continuously functioning institutions on earth.

Spook, there is no doubt that the Roman Catholic Church influenced some folks who rejected communism in some countries. Poland has a large number of Roman Catholics. The USSR did not. China most certainly does not. I doubt that the CCP is shaking in its boots over the Vatican’s opposition to communism. Lech Walesa, a Roman Catholic, saying that the Pope or the Roman church brought down communism doesn’t make it so. You, a Roman Catholic, saying that the CCP worries about threats to its power from the Roman Catholic church likewise does not make it so.

Jive Turkey, I agree with your central point that the Catholic Church is almost irrelevant to the political life of China. As a practicing Catholic though, why some seem to take us so seriously rather than just ignore us has me baffled. It seems to hinge on a few high-profile Catholic priests voicing their opinions.

Don’t like what we stand for? believe in? Just ignore us. That’s my preference. We’re not on any kind of membership drive or interested in convincing anyone of anything about us.

Several years ago Pope John Paul II made it official that Catholic clergy aren’t allowed to hold political office or be involved in politics other than to voice their personal opinions and that’s as it should be.

I would tend to agree with jiveturkey here. I don’t believe the ccp sees The church as treat the way it may have been in Eastern Europe. Why should they? They effectively control it and successfully contain and repress the dissident element. I don’t really see this as a battle betwenn the Catholic Church and the ccp anyway, it’s part of a wider authoritarian philosophy. The ccp, like any authoritarian government will not tolerate any institution that does not submit to control and scrutinyand more importantly it must echo the party line. Independant organisations are anathema. Its quite neatly encapsulated in Mussolini’s dictum “Everything for the State, nothing outside the State, nothing above the state”. This is a fundamental difference between such regimes and liberal democracy. It’s interesting of course that the church for so long couldn’t get along with liberal governments because it claimed something similar.

I also think there is an nationalist agenda here. The Catholic Church is seen as something foreign in China. Alien to Chinese tradition and cultures, it is often characterised as a result of the “shameful” treatment China received from the West. In short it’s held in a sort of xenophobic contempt. The fact that it owes allegiance to a foreign leader does nothing to help that. I think the Chinese Catholic Patrotic association is at least as much an attempt to sinicize it as to control it. Such fascist tendencies are nothing new…not even in the church.

[quote=“wraith”]I would tend to agree with jiveturkey here. I don’t believe the ccp sees The church as treat the way it may have been in Eastern Europe. Why should they? They effectively control it and successfully contain and repress the dissident element. I don’t really see this as a battle betwenn the Catholic Church and the ccp anyway, it’s part of a wider authoritarian philosophy. The ccp, like any authoritarian government will not tolerate any institution that does not submit to control and scrutinyand more importantly it must echo the party line. Independant organisations are anathema. Its quite neatly encapsulated in Mussolini’s dictum “Everything for the State, nothing outside the State, nothing above the state”. This is a fundamental difference between such regimes and liberal democracy. It’s interesting of course that the church for so long couldn’t get along with liberal governments because it claimed something similar.

I also think there is an nationalist agenda here. The Catholic Church is seen as something foreign in China. Alien to Chinese tradition and cultures, it is often characterised as a result of the “shameful” treatment China received from the West. In short it’s held in a sort of xenophobic contempt. The fact that it owes allegiance to a foreign leader does nothing to help that. I think the Chinese Catholic Patrotic association is at least as much an attempt to sinicize it as to control it. Such fascist tendencies are nothing new…not even in the church.[/quote]

Besides what you said, there is another reason why the CCP doesn’t like religions — religions don’t promote science. CCP was against any religion, not just Christianity. China is a substantially under-developed country and the last thing the government needs is having its people believe that there is someone high above who is going to take care of them. The CCP is all for development now and communists believe in science (or materialism). The Chinese population on average are under-educated and have a long history of superstition. When Mao took over, he was faced with a China where people went to temples rather than doctors when they got sick.(Even today, things like Fengshui or fortune telling are still very popular with the folks down south. Just imagine what it was like back then) He wanted to change that, and he wanted to change that in a short time. Extreme measures would be needed of course. Massive destruction of Buddist temples were carried out and religions were being demonized.

The bottomline is communism, deep down at the ideaological level, is against religion, be it foreign or not.

Is that why Mao had all the doctors sent to the countryside during the GPCR so that sick people had to go visit the party cadres rather than the Doctors. :s

Rumor has it that when Dalai Lama met Mao, the first thing Mao said to him is “Religion is opium”. not hard to picture how their conversation went after Mao’s “greeting”.

I don’t think the CCP leaders today think any differently than Mao about the nature of religion and its impact on social development. When Hu was in charge of Tibet, he was quite ruthless with the Tibetan Buddhists. Most of those poor folks want nothing more than being left alone to practice their religion, which, from outsider’s point of view, is practically doing nothing that would have an impact on outside society. They are a lot less imposing or agressive, if you like, than Christians.

Besides power which any authoritarian government is concerned/paranoid about, CCP also has an inherent/ideologic antagonism with religions, regardless what religion it is.

Quotation ; Besides what you said, there is another reason why the CCP doesn’t like religions — religions don’t promote science

It may well be that this is used as an excuse by the CCP for persecution of religous groups but I really can’t accept that it is a fundamental reason for it. I still maintain that it is more or less about power, they see it as a hearts and minds struggle.

Using medicine as an example of the CCPs commitment to Science it can clearly be seen that while there have been quite laudable improvements in health care it is always subordinate to ideology and the power position of the party or individuals.

bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/ … /7093/1543

Surely the Chinese government’s reaction to the SARS problem taught us that.

Incidentally the Catholic church too has had it’s battles with Science and possibly for similar reasons. Let it not be forgotten however that much mathematical, medicinal and astronomical knowledge was pioneered in Europe under the auspices of the Church. Copernicus dedicated his greatest work to Pope Paul III and before anyone makes reference to Galileo the truth of the matter is he was condemned for going against the received aristotelian views of the day. The lay scientific establishment did not support him because he could not prove a central part of his theory (which required more sensitive instruments than were available then) He was right and they were wrong but it was not for “anti science” he was silenced. It might also be worth remembering that the Jesuits introduced scientific astronomy to China.