Talk:Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association

Outlawed

Added some NPOV information. One correction is that the unofficial church has not technically been outlawed (in contrast to Falugong). Curiously the PRC law really doesn't have a strong concept of the banned organization. Roadrunner 20:34, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Is it really true that the CPCA still sticks to the Tridentine rite? I attended a mass in the largest Catholic church in Shanghai, where the mass was celebrated according to the Novus Ordo Missae of Paul VI. 62.47.73.113 21:38, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

CCPA Clergy and Rome

I changed the line about CCPA priests being secretly ordained by the underground church over to secretly reconciled and part of the underground church. The reason for this is that a priest can only be validly ordained once. As the Vatican recognizes the validity of Holy Orders within the CCPA, the priests would not be reordained. Rather they would be reconciled with the larger Roman Catholic Church. So reconciled would be the correct term than reordained.
JesseG 06:04, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC)

"Define the scope once"

Regarding this edit by SchmuckyTheCat, mainland China ≠ the People's Republic of China ≠ China. — Instantnood 17:01, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)

JFK & US comparison

If anyone thinks the US comparison is inappropriate, it can be moved down later in the article. It is relevant, I feel, because it shows that the Chinese attitude is not a completely isolated one that has never existed in other societies. Dpr 18:59, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• It seems kind of like the context needs to be explained. SchmuckyTheCat 01:42, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Can you elaborate further? It begins with a transition phrase... ~ Dpr 02:03, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I think the US comparison is a whitewash. It is an attempt to improve the public relations image of the PRC, and smears the US in the process by leaving out inconvenient details. Here are the NPOV facts: all cultures, incl. chinese and american, have a variety of people who fall on various spectrums from liberal to conservative, populist to libertarian, believer to nonbeliever, etc. That there are people in the US and people in the PRC who are leery of catholic allegiance to the pope is thus not the interesting part. The interesting part is that the US is a free speech democracy whose people debated the issue and elected JFK president over the wariness of some people, and the PRC is not and the undemocratic leadership has acted on its own "suspicions" about catholics to protect its own power and has infringed the basic human right of its people to believe what they want. The thoughts in your own head should be the most basic and protected of rights, and it's the one that the totalitarians always go after. Brassrat 13:38, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Generally saying that one thing is like another violates NPOV. Now if you can quote someone in the Chinese government who makes this comparison then you can put it in saying so and so argues that, but I don't recall anyone in the Chinese government ever making a comparison with JFK.

The Chinese attitude is not completely dissimilar to that demonstrated in many other countries throughout the history of anti-clericalism and prejudice against Catholics. For example, in the United States, candidates for public office often faced insinuations from the electorate that, if elected, these individuals would offer allegiance to a foreign power (i.e. the Vatican); such allegations were also made in regard to President John F. Kennedy before his election.

Roadrunner 06:07, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Translation

Can we start translating and adding any material not present in the English version? I will begin as soon as I get a chance. Thanks! Dpr 23:53, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC) 中国天主教爱国会(又称“地上教会”)，全国总部位于中国北京市后海柳荫街。是中国的一个区域性,政府性的组织。从某种意义上说，这个组织是天主教会在中国的最高权利机构。

中国天主教爱国会成立于1957年7月，其宗旨是“团结全国神长教友，发扬爱国主义精神，遵守国家政策法令，积极参加祖国社会主义现代化建设，促进国际天主教人士的友好往来，反对帝国主义、霸权主义，保卫世界和平，并协助政府贯彻宗教信仰自由政策”。

第一、二届主席皮漱石，第三届主席为宗怀德，第三届也就是目前的主席为傅铁山，他同时也是北京教区主教。由于按照《天主教法典》和教会的传统，天主教爱国会统治下的中国教会并没有做到与梵蒂冈圣座“共融”，并有“自圣”主教、反对“封圣”等事件影响，实际上是独立于普世天主教会之外的一个特殊的教会形态。

在天主教爱国会控制的教会之外，中国还存在一个不承认爱国会领导的教会，常被称为“地下教会”，有自己一套神职人员系统。但由于天主教爱国会为中国政府所支持，故而基本上只能秘密地进行活动。

---

this is also questionable

Regardless, it is has historically been the policy of the PRC government, including prior to 1949 in many respects, for the state to reserve the right to regulate all social activities for what it judges as the benefit of state and people.

This is also questionable

Such activities are tacitly permitted, though official policy toward the Pope in Rome remain the same.

Roadrunner 06:24, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Xinhua officially expressed condolences at the death of JPII, so there was a bit more than tacit permission.

Roadrunner 06:24, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

---

Still have problems with this.....

Sounds too much like text advocating a position.... Also, this probably belongs in a section on Religion in China in general.

I wouldn't have much of a problem if the text was cited so that we know who is arguing this position. Who believes this? Who doesn't believe this? Also why does this belong on a text in Catholicism as opposed to a general discussion on religion.

I wouldn't have a problem if the text said that "the official position of the PRC government is that" except the text doesn't seem to be an official position as far as I know. So I really would like to know exactly who argues this point.

If you can rewrite the paragraph so that it reads something like

According to X, the motives that gave rise to the CCPA are not unusual. Y cites as examples (foo), (foo), (foo). Furthermore, Z justifies the existence of the church as....

The interesting thing about the paragraph is that X, Y, and Z probably have nothing to do with the PRC government since the justification used in this paragraph is not one which I've heard the PRC government use recently. (In large part because the PRC really wants to establish relations with the Vatican to outflank Taiwan.) I'm interested to see who is trying to justify the CCPA in this way.

(If it was something that I heard the PRC government argue recently, I would have reworded the paragraph myself rather than moved it to talk.)

--- Roadrunner 06:44, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The governments of the world's 190+ countries in the contemporary era vary in their attitude toward religious influence -- particularly that tied to a religious authority outside the country, such as the Vatican -- in their societies. For instance, the government of Turkey, has attempted to eschew overly-powerful religious influences in that society, favoring instead secularization. The United States has historically held a principle of non-establishment or the separation between church and state. In many cases, however, the pressure to restrict religious or external influence has come from the society and culture and not directly from the state; several U.S. presidential candiates, and candidates for other office, including John F. Kennedy, later president, and Al Smith, faced pressure from citizens who would not support members of the Catholic Church as elected officials, fearing that they would be overly subject to influence from the Vatican and thus potential act in contrary to the will of their own country's electorate/populace.

Many observers have described a difference in the phenomena of civil society and state-society relations between East Asia and the Western world. As a result, what Westerners may see as state regulation of social activities, East Asian government often describe as necessary policies to preserve social stability.

CPCA support for abortion?

The article says that the CPCA supports abortion. Do we have any documentation for this? It seems unlikely that an organization, most of whose bishops are approved by the Vatican, would go against Catholic doctrine on a point like this. I don't know, I'm just wondering. Frjwoolley 20:37, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Independent, but not schizmatic

Catholic church never declared the Chinese Catholics attending CPCA-sponsored church services to be schismatic,. Also, they are regarded as an independent Catholic church—Preceding unsigned comment added by Sumaterana (talk • contribs)

They are not one of the Independent Catholic Churches. The article cited associates the CPCA, which is not a Church, not the Roman Catholics who attend CPCA-sponsored services, with "the proposal for a Church that is 'independent' of the Holy See in the religious sphere". Lima (talk) 14:18, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

References

Political similarities in history (not religious)

Is this similar to the establishment of various ex-Catholic groups in Europe (e.g. Church of England) with regards to the state selection of bishops, nationalization of property etc? 118.90.109.178 (talk) 08:14, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Sort of like, except that the Anglican case was a cleaner, bolder break, and a break from the dominant power of Europe. As Mark Twain said, history does not repeat itself, but it rhymes. Jim.henderson (talk) 03:08, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141030050853/http://www.vatican.va:80/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_29061958_ad-apostolorum-principis_en.html to http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_29061958_ad-apostolorum-principis_en.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141030050853/http://www.vatican.va:80/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_29061958_ad-apostolorum-principis_en.html to http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_29061958_ad-apostolorum-principis_en.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100210163332/http://www.vatican.va:80/holy_father/benedict_xvi/letters/2007/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20070527_china_en.html to http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/letters/2007/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20070527_china_en.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:01, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Name revert

Most sources (including the CCPA website) use the title "Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association". I have made a technical request to move this page back to that name. natemup (talk) 12:01, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. It was moved in 2022 without any discussion and should be moved back to "Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association". Thanks. - Amigao (talk) 14:05, 27 August 2024 (UTC)