Over the last several weeks I’ve sensed an eagerness on the part of the media and the faithful to label each and every feint and gesture between Beijing and the Vatican as having deep and lasting historical significance. To an extent, the recent ordinations in Guiyang and Beijing (both with papal and government approval) are important events suggesting a real shift in tone. But I think it’s important to remember that the two ordinations were just that – two ordinations. Publicly, at least, both Beijing and the Vatican claim that their approval was granted without any consultation with the other party (a diplomatic nicety and necessity that is almost certainly false – on both sides). And both sides have made efforts to downplay the importance of the Beijing ordination. For example, Archbishop Fernando Filoni, the Vatican’s third-ranking official, and one of the Church’s most experienced Asia and (in particular) China hands described the Beijing ordination as:
“…without a doubt, a positive sign. Let’s hope it continues.”
I thought of this very brief quote after reading Jen Ambrose’s round-up of bishop-related news. Ambrose, based in Shenzhen, points out that Gan Junqiu, the Vatican and Chinese-government approved candidate for bishop of Guanzhou, has yet to be ordained, despite the fact that his elevation was – supposedly – decided earlier this year.
There is good reason to believe that Gan and other candidates will, soon, be ordained. Earlier this month, a high-ranking Patriotic Association official told China Daily that it is “speeding up the process of selection and ordination of young bishops to better serve millions of followers in the country.” Among the dioceses named in the article were Beijing, Guizhou (Guiyang) – and Guangzhou.
From my perspective, watching the back-and-forth between the Vatican and Beijing over the last month has been like — watching the back-and-forth of a tennis match. Each respective party asserts its rights, then awaits the reply. In the case of the Beijing ordination, the Chinese side very much asserted its right to schedule and perform the ordination on its own terms. The Vatican remained quiet and respectful until afterwards, at which point it quietly and discretely released the news of the Pope’s approval. In a quiet coda to that event, the new bishop publicly thanked the pope at his first public appearance, post-ordination.
And now we await Beijing’s reply. So far as I’ve been able to glean, there were some vaguely positive comments from the CPA on the Pope’s role (as reported by the AP), and that’s about it. Words are one matter, and acts are another. In 2005, China celebrated several ordinations approved by the pope and the government, leading many to believe that a new chapter had dawned in the sticky relationship between the two parties. But then, in the spring of 2006, Beijing ordained two bishops without papal consent and the relationship plunged into its worst state in five years. In retrospect, many close observers feel that one cause of the illicit ordinations was the Vatican’s too-public role in the 2005 ordinations.
There will be additional ordinations in the coming months – we can be sure of that. But whether those ordination will follow the pattern set in Guiyang and Beijing is anybody’s guess. Indeed, as important as Guiyang and Beijing seemed, it now is clear that one set the stage for the other, and the second possibly set the stage for what is to come. But as even a cursory understanding of China’s fractious history with Catholicism will reveal, absolutely nothing is guaranteed. This all could go south, and fast. So, for the time being, let’s label the next ordination as the most important in years – until the one after that.