Cardinals deny seeking papal sway
By ARTHUR JONES
NCR Staff Washington
Two U.S. cardinals have denied a magazine's allegations that they
asked Pope John Paul II to influence the position the U.S. bishops' conference
takes on China.
New York Cardinal John O'Connor and Boston Cardinal Bernard Law
respectively described as "not factual" and "without foundation" a July 7
The New Republic cover story on religious persecution in China that
stated, in part, "The National Council [sic] of Catholic Bishops (NCCB), which
opposes renewing MFN ["most favored nation" trade status], has wavered on
dealing with Beijing; in 1996 it lobbied Congress to continue subsidizing
exchange programs with the Chinese 'Patriotic' churches."
The article continues, "The NCCB's John Carr says that the church
seeks 'reconciliation' in China." But the article said that, according to
Michael Horowitz of the conservative Hudson Institute think tank, in the past
year O'Connor and Law "have prompted the pope to pressure" the National
Conference of Catholic Bishops "to stop coddling Beijing, and the council
(NCCB) is beginning to make a U-turn on China."
An O'Connor spokesperson told NCR, "the cardinal has never
addressed the subject with the Holy Father. The cardinal said, 'I am very
concerned along with many other member bishops of the NCCB [about the plight of
Christians in China] but this is not a subject I have taken up with the Holy
Father.' "
In Boston, a spokesperson at Law's office said "the allegation or
rumor regarding Cardinal Law is false and without foundation. Cardinal Law
believes that the conference's position has been consistently appropriate."
When NCR contacted Horowitz to say the cardinals had denied
his assertion, he replied, "Well, I mean they would, wouldn't they. What can I
tell you?"
Despite the cardinals' demurral, Horowitz declared he was
"confident that Cardinals O'Connor and Law were playing heroic roles in turning
around the bishops' conference from its accommodationist approach."
He told NCR the bishops' conference had lobbied Congress
against cutting off taxpayers' money being spent on exchange programs that
involved the Chinese Patriotic churches. Conference spokesman Msgr. Frank
Maniscalco said that in fact the conference had "never taken a formal position"
on the issue.
As for commenting on the status of Catholics in other countries,
said Maniscalco, the conference follows the lead of the local bishops or, where
that is not possible, as in China, that of the Holy See.
"This is a bishops' conference," said Maniscalco. "We are in
contact with the Holy See and [on such international issues] we follow the
direction of the Holy See. The Holy See is not shy about making its feelings
known to the conference. MFN for China [which the U.S. bishops opposed] is a
decision of our government," he said, "so we deal with that as a policy of our
government."
In April, Archbishop Theodore McCarrick of Newark, N.J., chairman
of the bishops' Committee on International Policy, said "the time has come to
return to linking MFN trading status to improvements in human rights and
religious liberty."
In addressing "evidence of widespread religious persecution," in
addition to mentioning incidents in the Philippines, Pakistan, Burma and East
Timor, McCarrick singled out China and Vietnam, where "Christians, both
Catholic and Protestant, as well as Buddhists continue to suffer gravely for
their religious beliefs and practices."
John Carr, conference social development and world peace
department secretary, said he thought the idea that two U.S. cardinals would
have to "get the pope to lobby us -- that's quite impressive."
National Catholic Reporter, July 18,
1997
|