Le Forum Catholique

A S.E. Rev. M.le Card. G.B.Re, Doyen du Collège des Cardinaux

Monsieur le Cardinal,

Permettez-moi d'utiliser le moyen de la lettre ouverte pour une communication plus rapide.
Indirectement, j'ai lu votre lettre du 26 février qui (Prot. N. 1/2020) a également l'honneur d'avoir ainsi inauguré votre haute fonction de Doyen du Collège des Cardinaux.
J'admire le courage dont vous faites preuve en vous aventurant dans des domaines que vous reconnaissez également comme "complexes", ce qui met en péril le prestige de votre fonction honorable nouvellement inaugurée. Mais on sait qu'il existe aujourd'hui un vicepapa qui parvient à donner du courage à tous les serviteurs du Saint-Siège.
Venons-en à la lettre.

1. Pour clarifier la vision de Jean-Paul II et de Benoît XVI à l'égard du communisme, il me suffit maintenant de vous renvoyer aux pages 161-162 du livre "ultime conversazioni" (le pape Benoît m'en a donné un exemplaire avec la dédicace "en communion de prière et de pensée").
La question du journaliste Peter Seewald :
"Avez-vous partagé et soutenu activement l'Ostpolitik du Pape (Jean-Paul II) ?
Benoît a répondu : "Nous en parlions. Il était clair que la politique de Casaroli, bien que mise en œuvre avec les meilleures intentions, avait échoué.
La nouvelle ligne suivie par Jean-Paul II est le fruit de son expérience personnelle, du contact avec ces pouvoirs.
Bien sûr, on ne pouvait pas espérer que ce régime s'effondre rapidement, mais il était clair qu'au lieu d'être conciliant et d'accepter des compromis, il fallait s'y opposer par la force.
C'était la vision sous-jacente de Jean-Paul II, que je partageais".

2. Pour prouver que l'accord signé avait déjà été approuvé par Benoît XVI, il suffit de me montrer le texte signé, que je n'ai pas été autorisé à voir jusqu'à présent, et les preuves des archives, que vous avez pu vérifier. Il ne resterait plus qu'à expliquer pourquoi il n'a pas été signé à l'époque.

3. Le changement "d'époque" dans le sens du mot "indépendance", je le crains, n'existe que dans la tête de l'éminent secrétaire d'État, induit peut-être par une traduction erronée du chinois faite par le jeune minutante de la Congrégation pour l'évangélisation des peuples, maintenant monoculus rex in regno caecorum, qui était également co-responsable d'au moins 10 erreurs dans la traduction de la lettre du pape Benoît en 2007.
Mais étant donné que l'intelligence du Très Éminent est difficile pour moi de croire qu'il a été trompé, il est plus probable qu'il ait voulu "se laisser tromper".

4. Je ne comprends pas la dernière partie de sa lettre, du moins confuse. Les faits sont là. J'ai la preuve que le parolin manipule le Saint-Père, qui me montre toujours tant d'affection, mais ne répond pas à mes questions. Devant certaines positions du Saint-Siège que je ne peux pas comprendre, je dis à tous les frères désolés qui se tournent vers moi de ne pas critiquer ceux qui suivent ces dispositions. Toutefois, comme les dispositions laissent encore la liberté à ceux qui ont une objection de conscience, je les encourage à se retirer à l'état de catacombes, sans s'opposer à toute injustice, sinon ils finiraient par perdre davantage.
Qu'ai-je fait de mal ?

5. Je suis d'accord à 100% avec l'invitation à prier.
Je me souviens que récemment, le Saint-Siège a également recommandé l'invocation à Notre-Dame "Sub tuum praesidium" et à l'Archange Saint-Michel.
Il y a évidemment l'"Oremus pro Pontifice" qui se termine par "et non tradat eum in animam inimicorum ejus".
Je vous souhaite des moments plus heureux dans votre longue carrière de doyen du Collège des cardinaux.
Votre obligé,
Card. Zen


Premier dimanche de carême
De l'Évangile selon Matthieu (4:8-10)
Le diable l'emmena sur une très haute montagne et lui montra tous les royaumes du monde et leur gloire et lui dit : "Je te donnerai toutes ces choses si, en te jetant à mes pieds, tu m'adores.
Jésus lui répondit : "Va-t'en, Satan ! Car il est écrit : "Le Seigneur ton Dieu, tu l'adoreras, tu l'adoreras lui seul.

Traduit avec www.DeepL.com/Translator (version gratuite)oldyosef.hkdavc.com

HONG KONG, China, March 2, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Chinese cardinal Joseph Zen said he has “evidence” that Cardinal Pietro Parolin, the Vatican’s secretary of state, “manipulated” Pope Francis regarding the secret deal between China and the Vatican.

“Given, however, the intelligence of His Eminence [Cardinal Parolin], it is difficult for me to believe he was deceived, and more probable he wanted to deceive others,” Zen, the former bishop of Hong Kong, wrote in an open letter published on his website.

Zen reacted to a letter written by Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, who was made dean of the College of Cardinals by Pope Francis in January. His first official communication in his new position was a letter to all cardinals, in which he heavily criticized Zen for his opposition to the deal between China and the Holy See.

According to Re, “the expression ‘independent Church’ cannot be interpreted in an absolute manner, as ‘separation’ from the Pope, as it has been in the past.”

Zen replied that the change of meaning of the word “independence” exists “only in the mind of His Eminence the Secretary of State, caused perhaps by a faulty translation of the Chinese by a young clerk of the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples.”


This clerk, Zen continued, had some responsibility for at least ten errors in the translation of the letter Pope Benedict XVI had sent to Catholics in China in 2007.

In this context, Zen expressed his suspicion that Cardinal Parolin willfully wanted to deceive Pope Francis. “The facts are these,” he repeated. “I have evidence that Parolin manipulated the Holy Father, who always showed me great affection, but never responded to my questions.”

Cardinal Re also mentioned that Zen had affirmed “several times that no deal would have been better than a ‘bad deal.’”

“The last three Popes did not share such a position and have supported and accompanied the crafting of the Accord which, at the present, appeared to be the only one possible,” Re added.

In his response, Zen pointed to the interview book Last Testament, written by Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI and Peter Seewald. Asked about the “Ostpolitik” of Pope John Paul II, Benedict said the plans of Cardinal Agostino Casaroli had failed.

The new direction of the Polish pope resulted from his personal experience and contacts with communist governments, Benedict explained. John Paul thought being conciliatory and accepting compromises was a mistake. Instead, he wanted to oppose communism forcefully.

Benedict confirmed to Seewald that he shared the vision of Pope John Paul II.

Zen further questioned Re’s claim that the deal had been approved by Pope Benedict XVI. “It would have been sufficient to show me the signed text, which even to this day I have not been permitted to see,” as well as the evidence of the archive.

Re said he had seen the draft of the deal in the archive, which he claimed was approved at the time by Benedict.

“It would just be left to explain why it was not signed, then,” Zen added.

Cardinal Zen offered some additional subtle criticism.

“I admire your courage in venturing into issues that you also recognize to be ‘complex,’ jeopardizing the prestige of your newly begun honorable office. But it is known that today there is a vice Pope who manages to encourage all servants of the Holy See,” he wrote at the beginning of his letter.

Zen encouraged Catholics in China “to withdraw to the state of the catacombs, without opposing any injustice; otherwise they would end up losing more.” If Chinese Catholics cannot in good conscience join the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association, the “official church” in China, they should stay underground, he said.

Until recently, the popes had condemned the “official church” in strong terms.

“In recent years, for various reasons, you, my brother bishops, have encountered difficulties, since persons who are not ‘ordained,’ and sometimes not even baptized, control and take decisions concerning important ecclesial questions, including the appointment of bishops, in the name of various State agencies,” Pope Benedict wrote in his 2007 letter.

“Consequently, we have witnessed a demeaning of the Petrine and episcopal ministries by virtue of a vision of the Church according to which the Supreme Pontiff, the bishops and the priests risk becoming de facto persons without office and without power.”

Before Cardinal Zen’s own response to Cardinal Re, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò had already come out in support of the Chinese bishop, calling Re’s letter “ignominious and shameful.“

Like Zen, Viganò is convinced that Pope Benedict did not approve the agreement between China and the Vatican. “We all know of his strenuous resistance and repeated disapproval of the conditions imposed by a persecutory and bloody regime,” Viganò said.

He summarized the actions of the Vatican during the Francis pontificate as delivering “the Chinese Martyr Church into the hands of the Enemy.”

“It did so by signing the Secret Pact; it did so by legitimizing excommunicated ‘bishops’ who are agents of the regime; it did so by the deposition of legitimate bishops; it did so by forcing faithful priests to register with a church that has succumbed to the Communist dictatorship; it does so on a daily basis by keeping silent about the persecutory fury that has gained unprecedented strength, precisely since the signing of that unfortunate Agreement.”

“It is now doing so with this ignoble letter to all the cardinals, which is aimed at accusing you, denigrating you, and isolating you,” Viganò told Zen.

In a video interview last February, Cardinal Zen explained to LifeSiteNews the Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association “has always been objectively schismatic” and remains that way, “but with the blessing from the Holy See.”

At the time, he said of Cardinal Parolin, “I’m sorry to say, he is not a man of faith because he despises the heroes of faith.”

Life Site News

Votre dévoué Paterculus