22 ms·

Pope pulls speech on Hong Kong freedom, raising questions over Beijing pressure

130 points by abc-xyz 6y ago

raxxorrax 6y ago
Never bet on the church to defend your rights should be a long acquired wisdom by now.
- ethbro 6y ago
  That's reductive of complex traditions. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asylum_(antiquity) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asylum_(antiquity)
  - raxxorrax 6y ago
    I meant the church, not christianity. The roman catholic church killed christians all over Europe if they didn't accept the official doctrine. What is typical for the church is its behavior to suck up to anyone with influence or power.
- jpmoral 6y ago
  Individual priests, nuns, and laity have often been at the forefront of defending people's rights in dictatorships. The organisations' track records have been more checkered.
  - raxxorrax 6y ago
    True, I was more precise in another comment. I meant the roman catholic church specifically, not christians in general. And not all churches of course. When my father died when I was young I got into some financial troubles. The local christian community helped me with direct monetary support, no questions asked. I will certainly not forget that even if I payed them back multiple times by now and don't really believe. They also have a lot of shelters for homeless and others in need of help in my country without any missionary ambitions (today at least, historically it was for missionary purposes). They help out where the state fails and it fails a lot. Still the institution of the roman catholic church and christians are not synonymous to me. And any form of criticism is certainly directed at the churches power structures, not at their priests. I think the current pope is quite nice, but I disagree with him here.
peteretep 6y ago
Like all other multinationals, thirsty enough for access to the Chinese market it’s willing to look the other way Edit: ya know, this is probably an excellent idea for the church. Every extra Chinese Catholic is someone who will likely ultimately accept the Pope’s authority over the CCP’s, regardless of if there are CCP friendly bishops. Get a big enough beachhead amongst poor Chinese, and bide their time, and they’re probably on to something.
- BLKNSLVR 6y ago
  Ironically, exposing the limits of what was claimed to be omnipotence.
  - godzillabrennus 6y ago
    Reminds me of how early Christians cut out the Gospel of Judas.
  - humanrebar 6y ago
    Who's claiming omnipotence? Key Christian figures have been murdered since day 0.
    - nix23 6y ago
      >Christian figures have been murdered since day 0 Nah probably more the year 16-26 AD. ;)
  - dang 6y ago
    No religious flamebait on HN, please. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- Asooka 6y ago
  Nah, if Christianity gets big enough in China to threaten CCP rule, they'll break off from the Pope, form their own branch (sinodoxy?) and fight to be seen as an equal authority. Then they can do things like ban service in anything but Chinese and decree all Bibles must be in Chinese, etc. The only reason it hasn't happened yet is because Christianity is not big enough there.
HenryBemis 6y ago
To quote the Manic Street Preachers: "And if you tolerate this, then your children will be next" And in a more serious note, from "First they came.." [1]. It is about the cowardice of German intellectuals and certain clergy (including, by his own admission, Niemöller himself) following the Nazis' rise to power and subsequent incremental purging of their chosen targets, group after group.: First they came for the Communists - And I did not speak out - Because I was not a Communist Then they came for the Socialists - And I did not speak out - Because I was not a Socialist Then they came for the trade unionists - And I did not speak out - Because I was not a trade unionist Then they came for the Jews - And I did not speak out - Because I was not a Jew Then they came for me - And there was no one left - To speak out for me [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...
- dang 6y ago
  Please keep tedious ideological clichés and boilerplate off HN. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
mytailorisrich 6y ago
The Vatican and the Chinese government have had an uneasy relationship for a very long time (dare I say forever) and the Vatican has been working hard to reach an agreement about the appointment of bishops and other aspects in 2018. Perhaps they just felt that making such public comments would achieve nothing apart from undoing that work. The Catholic Church has been around for almost 2,000 years. I'm sure they know how to play a long game.
- ponker 6y ago
  The Church knows how to draft behind power. Hong Kong’s is receding, Beijing’s is burgeoning. No doubt onto whose teat the Church will hungrily latch.
  - joshuaissac 6y ago
    >The Church knows how to draft behind power. Hong Kong’s is receding, Beijing’s is burgeoning. No doubt onto whose teat the Church will hungrily latch. If that were the case, the Vatican should have been among the first to switch recognition from the Republic of China (Taiwan) to the PRC, but instead, it is the only remaining European state that still maintains full diplomatic relations with Taiwan.[1] 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_relations_of_Taiwan#Europe_(1_state) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_relations_of_Taiwan#Eu...
    - ponker 6y ago
      Wow, I was completely wrong. Thanks for the info
- coldtea 6y ago
  >The Vatican and the Chinese government have had an uneasy relationship for a very long time They probably picked them after their last relationship, which was about touting the US during the cold war, and working with the far-right to stir hysteria in Italy. How the tides turn... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio
LatteLazy 6y ago
The more pressing issue is that everyone more powerful than the Pope has so far found themselves impotent in the face of the Chinese threat. Trump, Merkel, Modi, Putin etc all too weak to act.
- bawolff 6y ago
  Are you really surprised that putin is not at the forefront of defending human rights in china?
  - LatteLazy 6y ago
    I'm surprised he's not more concerned by Chinese border expansion against India. A nuclear war on his doorstep might affect business, or Russia might be next, or it might invite more US activity in his back yard. But yeah, I think Putin gave up on internationalism back in the 2000s.
    - simonh 6y ago
      Destabilisation almost anywhere is bread and honey to Putin, it's what he lives on. Anyway that disputed border is 2,000km from the nearest Russian territory, which itself is some remote Siberian backwater. India buys a lot fo Russian military gear, so ka-ching!
    - peteretep 6y ago
      If I was a large, sparsely populated country that shared a border with China, I’d be more than a little worried about Chinese territorial ambitions. If they’re willing to rattle sabres with India over some Godforsaken rocks, imagine what they’d be willing to do for the territorial riches that lie North.
      - adventured 6y ago
        No question it's an issue for the coming decades. China still respects the military capabilities of Russia and their ability to defend their territory. Russia is well ahead of India in capabilities. The question is when or will that respect change and what would change it. Arrogance inevitably gets the better of all superpowers, it can't be more than 10-20 years before China starts openly trying to take Russian border territory. I also wouldn't want to be Mongolia. There's a potential that China will leave Mongolia intact as a buffer with the long Russian border. If China wants to expand its territory, there's no easier, larger target than Mongolia (17/18th largest nation by land with only 3m people and essentially no military ability to defend itself).
hotz 6y ago
Disappointing.
abellerose 6y ago
Why would China specifically care what the pope has to say? I understand the pope is the one not expressing anything but why would China even pressure him in the first place. I thought China was already prohibiting religion from taking place. So what leverage does China have on the pope?
- starfallg 6y ago
  Catholicism exists and is heavily regulated in China. The CCP (unsurprisingly) appoints the bisbops. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_in_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_in_China
  - k__ 6y ago
    "the Chinese government established the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association,[2] which rejects the authority of the Holy See" What about Jesus? lol
    - netsharc 6y ago
      You kid, but I'd say humans disagreeing about what the man (and his boy) in the sky thinks has been the source of millennia of conflict...
    - raxxorrax 6y ago
      Every Lutheran christian rejects their authority too.
      - k__ 6y ago
        That's why I find this even funnier. What is left of the catholic church if you reject the pope? Protestants
        dragonwriter 6y ago
        > What is left of the catholic church if you reject the pope? > Protestants I think you mean “Eastern Orthodox”, as they both were rejecting the primacy (at least, in the terms Catholics define it) of the Pope long before Protestants existed and remain closer to the Roman Catholics on most points other than the primacy of the Pope than Protestants, who reject a lot more about Catholicism than the role of the Pope.
newbie578 6y ago
I guess freedom truly has a price. Good to know... The world needs people like Muhammad Ali who were willing to risk financial gain for justice. The current world is full of celebrity hypocrites, e.g. Lebron James, Kaepernick, Steve Kerr, Merkel, Trump, and now even the Pope...
- jacquesm 6y ago
  Merkel and Trump should never be in the same line-up. She's the real thing and Trump is a complete fraud.
  - newbie578 6y ago
    Please do explain how is Merkel the real thing? She is known in Germany to not offend anybody, because she doesn't do anything. She doesn't dare raise a question to China and the genocide they are doing, but she is sure willing to insult Poland, or trash America because of Trump's tweets.
    - jacquesm 6y ago
      (1) Merkel is an accomplished scientist, Trump is a complete fraud. (2) Merkel tends to act from her principles, Trump doesn't have any that I've been able to detect. You may not agree with those principles but at least she has them. I don't always agree with her either but I can actually follow her reasoning and understand why to her these things make sense. (3) Merkel has an 88% approval rating from those in her own party, and 70%+ of those when polled across all of Germany. (4) The EU, not Germany in particular should take a much stronger stance on Human Rights issues in China, but realpolitik unfortunately seems to stand in the way of this. Insulting the Polish government (not Poland, you can't insult a country) is something that the Polish people that I know are going much further in than Merkel ever will, and with good reason. She doesn't trash America, she trashes Trump, and again, rightly so.
      - theandrewbailey 6y ago
        > (1) Merkel is an accomplished scientist, Trump is a complete fraud. Trump is an accomplished businessman with a large array of enterprises built over ~50 years. > (2) Merkel tends to act from her principles, Trump doesn't have any that I've been able to detect. Trump's principles mean that he puts American interests first, even if it means being an bully about it. He has principles; whether they are good or bad is another question.
digitalcraft 6y ago
The discrimination the catholic church in China suffers is hardly talked about. The intimidation by the Chinese state on the church is incredible and many members have been killed or incarcerated for maintaining the independence of the church from the Chinese state. On human terms it makes no sense to continue church operations in china just like some companies pulling out of china, but the church has not run on those terms. For centuries the church and her members in China struggled to maintain their identity in the face of discrimination, and there has been progress even though small. I don't think it makes sense to let go of a winning strategy albeit a slow one given the conditions.
- jacquesm 6y ago
  Churches and governments through the ages have always been at odds about this because both are power structures and the Chinese government - unlike many other governments - does not subscribe to any form of power sharing at all. If you look at the role of the Catholic church in Poland during the end of the Communist time then you can understand why: without support of the Church there is a good chance that Solidarity would have been nipped in the bud.
- paganel 6y ago
  Exactly, this is a centuries-long strategy adopted by the Catholic Church.
- tibbydudeza 6y ago
  The state sanctioned church "Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association" has only in 2018 acknowledged that the Vatican can veto the appointment of their bishops. I guess he did not want to upset them after this major concession.
FooBarWidget 6y ago
I want to express an unpopular opinion. As someone who speaks Cantonese (same language used in Hong Kong), who was born on the mainland, who has a mainland wife, who was brought up with Hong Kong television and culture, who looked up to Hong Kong as a shining example for decades, I care about the Hong Kong topic deeply. > Do you disagree with me? If so, I'd love to hear why. < What I say will most likely not fit your understanding of the situation. I know it is tempting to dismiss me out of hand. However, I ask you to remain open minded. I don't just make a bunch of claims: I've provided arguments and sources. You don't have to agree with me, but I invite you to at least investigate my sources, and to discuss with me with arguments as well. Here goes: ---- The Hong Kong "protests" are not about freedom or democracy. That's just a pretext for xenophobia, hate against mainlanders, and secessionism. Neither are they "peaceful". Why do I say this? Everyone knows China is an authoritarian regime and everybody in the free world must stand up against the big baddy, right? I used to be sympathetic to the Hong Kong protests. As someone who has lived in Europe for more than 25 years, I understand the importance of democracy. I used to call for mainlanders to be more understanding of the Hong Kong people's cause. However, more and more evidence popped up that "freedom" and "democracy" are just excuses. The movement have long been hijacked by violent rioters who: - Attack innocent civilians, whose only "crime" is that they disagree with the "pro-democracy" rioters. Famously, a man was literally burned alive[1] simply for disagreeing. In another case, a woman was gang-attacked by rioters[2] simply for removing roadblocks that the rioters put down to hinder the police. - Vandalize public and private property. In particular, shops and businesses, whose owners are seen as not supportive of the "pro-democracy" movement, are vandalized. See for example [3], where rioters vandalized a bank. They later apologized for vandalizing "the wrong bank", meaning that it's okay to vandalize as long as it's the right target! [1] https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/law-and-crime/article/3037243/hong-kong-father-two-burned-alive-after-chasing https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/law-and-crime/article/30... [2] https://www.scmp.com/video/hong-kong/3085864/online-video-footage-shows-woman-trying-remove-roadblocks-being-attacked https://www.scmp.com/video/hong-kong/3085864/online-video-fo... [3] https://mothership.sg/2019/10/news-hong-kong-protest-east-asia-bank/ https://mothership.sg/2019/10/news-hong-kong-protest-east-as... RECOMMENDED: Have a look at this letter from a Hong Kong resident, explaining the situation much better than I do: https://thefinanser.com/2020/07/am-i-wrong-about-hong-kong.html/ https://thefinanser.com/2020/07/am-i-wrong-about-hong-kong.h... You might be wondering, how representative are the above examples? Could I have just cherry-picked a few violent cases to prove my point? Surely it's just a few bad apples, right? The violence is widespread (although dying down since November after the police arrested a huge number of rioters, who sheltered in Hong Kong Polytec University and turned it into a bomb-making factory). It's not just "a few bad apples". Take a look at this compilation of rioters' violence: https://www.truth-hk.com/ https://www.truth-hk.com/ Am I saying all Hong Kong protesters are rioters? No, many are indeed peaceful. What I have a problem with, is that the western mainstream media uncritically paints all Hong Kong rioters as heroes. Despite the fact that the entire movement have been hijacked by criminals, the media is mostly still willingly blind to their crimes, because it fits their prejudice that anyone who "stands up to big bad China" must be freedom fighters. The rioters know this and make use of this. They want western media to portray them as heroes, so they threaten people who dare condemning the violence. ---- You may ask: even if all this is true, why is all this important? Isn't violence a legitimate means against the Chinese state? Isn't violence justified in a fight for freedom? According to the 2019 Human Freedom Index by the Cato Institute, Hong Kong ranked number 3, according to measurable freedoms. And the Cato Institute is by no means a pro-China organization. What freedoms are they fighting for, that they don't already have? Let's say they get universal suffrage. What's the first concrete thing they want to change? Strangely, most aren't able to answer. And yet, the violence in the past year has uprooted many people's lives. Isn't it ironic that the biggest loss of freedom and normal live has been caused by the very people who say that they're fighting for freedom? Isn't it ironic that the people who say they're supporting rule of law and freedom of speech, break the law and engage in violence with anybody they disagree with? Where is the justice in this? Have a look at this argument in Germany, between a pro-China mainlander and Hong Kong protesters: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_SqKY5haqg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_SqKY5haqg Luckily, these protesters weren't violent. But notice how the protesters are repeating a mindless mantra, and are unable to engage in a rational discussion with good arguments. Isn't this very strange? What freedoms, exactly, are they fighting for? We've seen rioters waving the UK and US flags[4]. There were even open calls for Trump (of all people!) to "liberate" them. Isn't that a bit strange? ---- This isn't about freedom. This is about secessionism. Why secede? You may think: isn't it obvious? Who wants to be part of China, an authoritarian regime? Well, these people want to secede by whatever violent means possible, even if it means destroying one's home and destroying the lives of fellow citizen. Can you call this justice? Can you call this a good thing? And is the depiction of China as an authoritarian regime, a dystopia, really correct? The fact is, for mainland China, the past 30 years have been the best ones in the past 3000 years. When it comes to individual political freedoms, mainland China still lags behind the best. But individual political freedoms aren't the only things that matter. What about the freedom to live? Freedom from fear? Freedom to not starve? Freedom to be able to build your family and to have a good life? In these, mainland China have made tremendous progress. Have a look at this article, "The American Dream is Alive in China": https://palladiummag.com/2019/10/11/the-american-dream-is-alive-in-china/ https://palladiummag.com/2019/10/11/the-american-dream-is-al... This progress should not be understated. It isn't "they've only managed to do a little bit worse than 30 years ago", it's the freak'n biggest endeavour in human history! Think about: if China is so bad, why do hundreds of millions of Chinese travel abroad every year, and why does nearly everybody return willingly? Heck, why do I still visit China? What has Beijing concretely done so far? For the past year, people have been yelling non-stop that "soon" Beijing will roll in the tanks, Tiananmen style. That never happened. During the only time the People's Liberation Army headed out of their barracks, they were off-duty — not wearing their uniforms — and all they did was clearing roadblocks placed by rioters. Am I saying China is a utopia? By no means. China has many problems. But the depiction of western media of China as some sort of dystopian hellhole, is incorrect. Back to secessionism. Why do some people want to secede? One reason is because they've been fed a lie about China: that it's a backwards, dystopian hellhole. Their educational textbooks largely ignore all the progress made in China in the past 30 years. In most recent cases, a primary school test question: "what were the benefits from Japanese invasion to China in WWII?" Can you imagine a text book asking, "what were the benefits from Nazi Germany's holocaust"? The Japanese during WWII were pretty much the Nazis of Asia. With "education" like this, is it any wonder that 80% of the rioters are teenagers? This isn't even a "we are against the CCP, not the Chinese people" thing. Racism against mainlanders is rampant. Some Hong Kongers feel superior to mainlanders, because supposedly Hong Kongers are more "civilized", more "free", etc. Some newspapers openly called mainlanders "locusts": https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-16828134 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-16828134 Some want to secede, because they are indoctrinated to think they are "superior" to mainlanders, not because of any actual, rational interests or policy disagreements. Have a look at this long discussion (warning: 1+ hour) with a guy in Hong Kong who wants to establish a new party that aims to be a middle ground group: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xer6dQlzSSs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xer6dQlzSSs He speaks of the fact that the pro-democracy group rarely actually discusses any, concrete policy disagreements, nor do they propose any useful policy changes. It's all filibustering and obstructing China just for the heck of it. How is any of this freedom? How will this sort of behavior result in a better life for the citizen of Hong Kong? ---- Am I a CCP shill? Am I a bot? Well, have a look at my long Internet history. My Github has been active for 10+ years. Why am I saying all this? Because I can't stand the injustice. Am I defending China? I ask: why does that matter? Isn't truth more important? Am I saying that the Hong Kong people shouldn't ask for more freedom? No, they should be able to. But this should be backed by rationality. At the very least, don't you think it's important to be able to answer the question of what they concretely want to change? What we see today is not rational, nor does it actually improve people's lives. Am I saying China didn't pressure the pope? No. I don't know what's going on there. Do the Hong Kong people agree with what I say here? Well, take a look at this letter from a Hong Kong resident (if you haven't already): https://thefinanser.com/2020/07/am-i-wrong-about-hong-kong.html/ https://thefinanser.com/2020/07/am-i-wrong-about-hong-kong.h... Furthermore, 3 million people signed a petition in SUPPORT of the national security law. https://www.thestar.com.my/aseanplus/aseanplus-news/2020/06/01/nearly-293-million-hk-residents-sign-petition-supporting-national-security-legislation https://www.thestar.com.my/aseanplus/aseanplus-news/2020/06/... Think about it. 3 million signatures: that's more than the number of people who joined the freedom marches. You may be thinking: signing a petition is so easy, so 3 million signatures mean nothing. But think about it: it's a freak'n national security law, who would be so crazy to sign it, no matter how easy it is to sign? But apparently, people are so fed up with the rioters, that they would rather risk supporting this law than to put up with the status quo where there is no security law. Do you disagree with me? If so, I'd love to hear why.
m0zg 6y ago
Such a transparent scam. It's like Disney removing black actor in the Chinese Star Wars poster, while lecturing the US audience on racial justice: https://www.cnn.com/2015/12/08/asia/star-wars-china-racist-poster/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2015/12/08/asia/star-wars-china-racist-p..., or LeBron James carrying water for the Chinese when discussing Hong Kong.
mensetmanusman 6y ago
This falls into the area of ethics under extortion. e.g. consider the act of paying a bribe. Scenario 1: You pay the bribe and make 10x the amount due to faster govt. processing. Scenario 2: You pay the bribe to save someones life who will die otherwise. Paying the bribe in Scenario 1 is immoral and paying in Scenario 2 is moral. Dealing with China is more akin to Scenario 2. The Catholic church is the oldest institution in the world, it knows it can wait.
- thinkingemote 6y ago
  As the late Terry Pratchett wrote in his book Small Gods, "....the truth is too precious to die for..."
- onion2k 6y ago
  Given how wealthy and powerful the Catholic church is, and how much the people who run the church would like it to stay that way, I suspect it's not just Scenario 2.
  - mensetmanusman 6y ago
    The Catholic church doesn’t globally pool their wealth. “ In 2010, the Vatican had an income of $326 million and ran a $13 million budget surplus, but in 2011 the Vatican ran a $19 million deficit. And while some of that money obviously went to maintaining church buildings and art, much of it also went to charitable causes. Recent re-evaluations of Vatican assets show that the Vatican has approximately $1 billion in total assets. For comparison, Harvard University’s endowment is over $30 billion. So, relatively speaking, the Catholic Church is not really wealthy, and no one blames museums for maintaining their art work and structures. “
    - onion2k 6y ago
      The Vatican owns more than 71,659,919 hectares of land around the world, mostly in prime areas of cities. A single hectare in London is worth 7 or 8 million dollars alone. Then there's the massive amounts of gold, buildings, art, etc on top. I can believe the Vatican itself, as in the tiny city state in Italy, is worth $1bn, but the Catholic Church owns hundreds of billions of dollars worth of assets. If they evaluated it all at just $1bn then they lied.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
nietzschebrod 6y ago
I predict some troubles with his next reincarnation.
morninglight 6y ago
Anyone looking to the Catholic church for moral leadership is living in a fantasy world with no grounding in current reality or historical precedent.
- dang 6y ago
  No religious flamebait on HN, please.

130 points by abc-xyz 6y ago

raxxorrax 6y ago

Never bet on the church to defend your rights should be a long acquired wisdom by now.

ethbro 6y ago
That's reductive of complex traditions. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asylum_(antiquity) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asylum_(antiquity)
- raxxorrax 6y ago
  I meant the church, not christianity. The roman catholic church killed christians all over Europe if they didn't accept the official doctrine. What is typical for the church is its behavior to suck up to anyone with influence or power.
jpmoral 6y ago
Individual priests, nuns, and laity have often been at the forefront of defending people's rights in dictatorships. The organisations' track records have been more checkered.
- raxxorrax 6y ago
  True, I was more precise in another comment. I meant the roman catholic church specifically, not christians in general. And not all churches of course. When my father died when I was young I got into some financial troubles. The local christian community helped me with direct monetary support, no questions asked. I will certainly not forget that even if I payed them back multiple times by now and don't really believe. They also have a lot of shelters for homeless and others in need of help in my country without any missionary ambitions (today at least, historically it was for missionary purposes). They help out where the state fails and it fails a lot. Still the institution of the roman catholic church and christians are not synonymous to me. And any form of criticism is certainly directed at the churches power structures, not at their priests. I think the current pope is quite nice, but I disagree with him here.

peteretep 6y ago

Like all other multinationals, thirsty enough for access to the Chinese market it’s willing to look the other way Edit: ya know, this is probably an excellent idea for the church. Every extra Chinese Catholic is someone who will likely ultimately accept the Pope’s authority over the CCP’s, regardless of if there are CCP friendly bishops. Get a big enough beachhead amongst poor Chinese, and bide their time, and they’re probably on to something.

BLKNSLVR 6y ago
Ironically, exposing the limits of what was claimed to be omnipotence.
- godzillabrennus 6y ago
  Reminds me of how early Christians cut out the Gospel of Judas.
- humanrebar 6y ago
  Who's claiming omnipotence? Key Christian figures have been murdered since day 0.
  - nix23 6y ago
    >Christian figures have been murdered since day 0 Nah probably more the year 16-26 AD. ;)
- dang 6y ago
  No religious flamebait on HN, please. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Asooka 6y ago
Nah, if Christianity gets big enough in China to threaten CCP rule, they'll break off from the Pope, form their own branch (sinodoxy?) and fight to be seen as an equal authority. Then they can do things like ban service in anything but Chinese and decree all Bibles must be in Chinese, etc. The only reason it hasn't happened yet is because Christianity is not big enough there.

HenryBemis 6y ago

To quote the Manic Street Preachers: "And if you tolerate this, then your children will be next" And in a more serious note, from "First they came.." [1]. It is about the cowardice of German intellectuals and certain clergy (including, by his own admission, Niemöller himself) following the Nazis' rise to power and subsequent incremental purging of their chosen targets, group after group.: First they came for the Communists - And I did not speak out - Because I was not a Communist Then they came for the Socialists - And I did not speak out - Because I was not a Socialist Then they came for the trade unionists - And I did not speak out - Because I was not a trade unionist Then they came for the Jews - And I did not speak out - Because I was not a Jew Then they came for me - And there was no one left - To speak out for me [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...

dang 6y ago
Please keep tedious ideological clichés and boilerplate off HN. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

mytailorisrich 6y ago

The Vatican and the Chinese government have had an uneasy relationship for a very long time (dare I say forever) and the Vatican has been working hard to reach an agreement about the appointment of bishops and other aspects in 2018. Perhaps they just felt that making such public comments would achieve nothing apart from undoing that work. The Catholic Church has been around for almost 2,000 years. I'm sure they know how to play a long game.

ponker 6y ago
The Church knows how to draft behind power. Hong Kong’s is receding, Beijing’s is burgeoning. No doubt onto whose teat the Church will hungrily latch.
- joshuaissac 6y ago
  >The Church knows how to draft behind power. Hong Kong’s is receding, Beijing’s is burgeoning. No doubt onto whose teat the Church will hungrily latch. If that were the case, the Vatican should have been among the first to switch recognition from the Republic of China (Taiwan) to the PRC, but instead, it is the only remaining European state that still maintains full diplomatic relations with Taiwan.[1] 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_relations_of_Taiwan#Europe_(1_state) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_relations_of_Taiwan#Eu...
  - ponker 6y ago
    Wow, I was completely wrong. Thanks for the info
coldtea 6y ago
>The Vatican and the Chinese government have had an uneasy relationship for a very long time They probably picked them after their last relationship, which was about touting the US during the cold war, and working with the far-right to stir hysteria in Italy. How the tides turn... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio

LatteLazy 6y ago

The more pressing issue is that everyone more powerful than the Pope has so far found themselves impotent in the face of the Chinese threat. Trump, Merkel, Modi, Putin etc all too weak to act.

bawolff 6y ago
Are you really surprised that putin is not at the forefront of defending human rights in china?
- LatteLazy 6y ago
  I'm surprised he's not more concerned by Chinese border expansion against India. A nuclear war on his doorstep might affect business, or Russia might be next, or it might invite more US activity in his back yard. But yeah, I think Putin gave up on internationalism back in the 2000s.
  - simonh 6y ago
    Destabilisation almost anywhere is bread and honey to Putin, it's what he lives on. Anyway that disputed border is 2,000km from the nearest Russian territory, which itself is some remote Siberian backwater. India buys a lot fo Russian military gear, so ka-ching!
  - peteretep 6y ago
    If I was a large, sparsely populated country that shared a border with China, I’d be more than a little worried about Chinese territorial ambitions. If they’re willing to rattle sabres with India over some Godforsaken rocks, imagine what they’d be willing to do for the territorial riches that lie North.
    - adventured 6y ago
      No question it's an issue for the coming decades. China still respects the military capabilities of Russia and their ability to defend their territory. Russia is well ahead of India in capabilities. The question is when or will that respect change and what would change it. Arrogance inevitably gets the better of all superpowers, it can't be more than 10-20 years before China starts openly trying to take Russian border territory. I also wouldn't want to be Mongolia. There's a potential that China will leave Mongolia intact as a buffer with the long Russian border. If China wants to expand its territory, there's no easier, larger target than Mongolia (17/18th largest nation by land with only 3m people and essentially no military ability to defend itself).

hotz 6y ago

Disappointing.

abellerose 6y ago

Why would China specifically care what the pope has to say? I understand the pope is the one not expressing anything but why would China even pressure him in the first place. I thought China was already prohibiting religion from taking place. So what leverage does China have on the pope?

starfallg 6y ago
Catholicism exists and is heavily regulated in China. The CCP (unsurprisingly) appoints the bisbops. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_in_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_in_China
- k__ 6y ago
  "the Chinese government established the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association,[2] which rejects the authority of the Holy See" What about Jesus? lol
  - netsharc 6y ago
    You kid, but I'd say humans disagreeing about what the man (and his boy) in the sky thinks has been the source of millennia of conflict...
  - raxxorrax 6y ago
    Every Lutheran christian rejects their authority too.
    - k__ 6y ago
      That's why I find this even funnier. What is left of the catholic church if you reject the pope? Protestants
      - dragonwriter 6y ago
        > What is left of the catholic church if you reject the pope? > Protestants I think you mean “Eastern Orthodox”, as they both were rejecting the primacy (at least, in the terms Catholics define it) of the Pope long before Protestants existed and remain closer to the Roman Catholics on most points other than the primacy of the Pope than Protestants, who reject a lot more about Catholicism than the role of the Pope.

newbie578 6y ago

I guess freedom truly has a price. Good to know... The world needs people like Muhammad Ali who were willing to risk financial gain for justice. The current world is full of celebrity hypocrites, e.g. Lebron James, Kaepernick, Steve Kerr, Merkel, Trump, and now even the Pope...

jacquesm 6y ago
Merkel and Trump should never be in the same line-up. She's the real thing and Trump is a complete fraud.
- newbie578 6y ago
  Please do explain how is Merkel the real thing? She is known in Germany to not offend anybody, because she doesn't do anything. She doesn't dare raise a question to China and the genocide they are doing, but she is sure willing to insult Poland, or trash America because of Trump's tweets.
  - jacquesm 6y ago
    (1) Merkel is an accomplished scientist, Trump is a complete fraud. (2) Merkel tends to act from her principles, Trump doesn't have any that I've been able to detect. You may not agree with those principles but at least she has them. I don't always agree with her either but I can actually follow her reasoning and understand why to her these things make sense. (3) Merkel has an 88% approval rating from those in her own party, and 70%+ of those when polled across all of Germany. (4) The EU, not Germany in particular should take a much stronger stance on Human Rights issues in China, but realpolitik unfortunately seems to stand in the way of this. Insulting the Polish government (not Poland, you can't insult a country) is something that the Polish people that I know are going much further in than Merkel ever will, and with good reason. She doesn't trash America, she trashes Trump, and again, rightly so.
    - theandrewbailey 6y ago
      > (1) Merkel is an accomplished scientist, Trump is a complete fraud. Trump is an accomplished businessman with a large array of enterprises built over ~50 years. > (2) Merkel tends to act from her principles, Trump doesn't have any that I've been able to detect. Trump's principles mean that he puts American interests first, even if it means being an bully about it. He has principles; whether they are good or bad is another question.

digitalcraft 6y ago

The discrimination the catholic church in China suffers is hardly talked about. The intimidation by the Chinese state on the church is incredible and many members have been killed or incarcerated for maintaining the independence of the church from the Chinese state. On human terms it makes no sense to continue church operations in china just like some companies pulling out of china, but the church has not run on those terms. For centuries the church and her members in China struggled to maintain their identity in the face of discrimination, and there has been progress even though small. I don't think it makes sense to let go of a winning strategy albeit a slow one given the conditions.

jacquesm 6y ago
Churches and governments through the ages have always been at odds about this because both are power structures and the Chinese government - unlike many other governments - does not subscribe to any form of power sharing at all. If you look at the role of the Catholic church in Poland during the end of the Communist time then you can understand why: without support of the Church there is a good chance that Solidarity would have been nipped in the bud.
paganel 6y ago
Exactly, this is a centuries-long strategy adopted by the Catholic Church.
tibbydudeza 6y ago
The state sanctioned church "Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association" has only in 2018 acknowledged that the Vatican can veto the appointment of their bishops. I guess he did not want to upset them after this major concession.

FooBarWidget 6y ago

I want to express an unpopular opinion. As someone who speaks Cantonese (same language used in Hong Kong), who was born on the mainland, who has a mainland wife, who was brought up with Hong Kong television and culture, who looked up to Hong Kong as a shining example for decades, I care about the Hong Kong topic deeply. > Do you disagree with me? If so, I'd love to hear why. < What I say will most likely not fit your understanding of the situation. I know it is tempting to dismiss me out of hand. However, I ask you to remain open minded. I don't just make a bunch of claims: I've provided arguments and sources. You don't have to agree with me, but I invite you to at least investigate my sources, and to discuss with me with arguments as well. Here goes: ---- The Hong Kong "protests" are not about freedom or democracy. That's just a pretext for xenophobia, hate against mainlanders, and secessionism. Neither are they "peaceful". Why do I say this? Everyone knows China is an authoritarian regime and everybody in the free world must stand up against the big baddy, right? I used to be sympathetic to the Hong Kong protests. As someone who has lived in Europe for more than 25 years, I understand the importance of democracy. I used to call for mainlanders to be more understanding of the Hong Kong people's cause. However, more and more evidence popped up that "freedom" and "democracy" are just excuses. The movement have long been hijacked by violent rioters who: - Attack innocent civilians, whose only "crime" is that they disagree with the "pro-democracy" rioters. Famously, a man was literally burned alive[1] simply for disagreeing. In another case, a woman was gang-attacked by rioters[2] simply for removing roadblocks that the rioters put down to hinder the police. - Vandalize public and private property. In particular, shops and businesses, whose owners are seen as not supportive of the "pro-democracy" movement, are vandalized. See for example [3], where rioters vandalized a bank. They later apologized for vandalizing "the wrong bank", meaning that it's okay to vandalize as long as it's the right target! [1] https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/law-and-crime/article/3037243/hong-kong-father-two-burned-alive-after-chasing https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/law-and-crime/article/30... [2] https://www.scmp.com/video/hong-kong/3085864/online-video-footage-shows-woman-trying-remove-roadblocks-being-attacked https://www.scmp.com/video/hong-kong/3085864/online-video-fo... [3] https://mothership.sg/2019/10/news-hong-kong-protest-east-asia-bank/ https://mothership.sg/2019/10/news-hong-kong-protest-east-as... RECOMMENDED: Have a look at this letter from a Hong Kong resident, explaining the situation much better than I do: https://thefinanser.com/2020/07/am-i-wrong-about-hong-kong.html/ https://thefinanser.com/2020/07/am-i-wrong-about-hong-kong.h... You might be wondering, how representative are the above examples? Could I have just cherry-picked a few violent cases to prove my point? Surely it's just a few bad apples, right? The violence is widespread (although dying down since November after the police arrested a huge number of rioters, who sheltered in Hong Kong Polytec University and turned it into a bomb-making factory). It's not just "a few bad apples". Take a look at this compilation of rioters' violence: https://www.truth-hk.com/ https://www.truth-hk.com/ Am I saying all Hong Kong protesters are rioters? No, many are indeed peaceful. What I have a problem with, is that the western mainstream media uncritically paints all Hong Kong rioters as heroes. Despite the fact that the entire movement have been hijacked by criminals, the media is mostly still willingly blind to their crimes, because it fits their prejudice that anyone who "stands up to big bad China" must be freedom fighters. The rioters know this and make use of this. They want western media to portray them as heroes, so they threaten people who dare condemning the violence. ---- You may ask: even if all this is true, why is all this important? Isn't violence a legitimate means against the Chinese state? Isn't violence justified in a fight for freedom? According to the 2019 Human Freedom Index by the Cato Institute, Hong Kong ranked number 3, according to measurable freedoms. And the Cato Institute is by no means a pro-China organization. What freedoms are they fighting for, that they don't already have? Let's say they get universal suffrage. What's the first concrete thing they want to change? Strangely, most aren't able to answer. And yet, the violence in the past year has uprooted many people's lives. Isn't it ironic that the biggest loss of freedom and normal live has been caused by the very people who say that they're fighting for freedom? Isn't it ironic that the people who say they're supporting rule of law and freedom of speech, break the law and engage in violence with anybody they disagree with? Where is the justice in this? Have a look at this argument in Germany, between a pro-China mainlander and Hong Kong protesters: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_SqKY5haqg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_SqKY5haqg Luckily, these protesters weren't violent. But notice how the protesters are repeating a mindless mantra, and are unable to engage in a rational discussion with good arguments. Isn't this very strange? What freedoms, exactly, are they fighting for? We've seen rioters waving the UK and US flags[4]. There were even open calls for Trump (of all people!) to "liberate" them. Isn't that a bit strange? ---- This isn't about freedom. This is about secessionism. Why secede? You may think: isn't it obvious? Who wants to be part of China, an authoritarian regime? Well, these people want to secede by whatever violent means possible, even if it means destroying one's home and destroying the lives of fellow citizen. Can you call this justice? Can you call this a good thing? And is the depiction of China as an authoritarian regime, a dystopia, really correct? The fact is, for mainland China, the past 30 years have been the best ones in the past 3000 years. When it comes to individual political freedoms, mainland China still lags behind the best. But individual political freedoms aren't the only things that matter. What about the freedom to live? Freedom from fear? Freedom to not starve? Freedom to be able to build your family and to have a good life? In these, mainland China have made tremendous progress. Have a look at this article, "The American Dream is Alive in China": https://palladiummag.com/2019/10/11/the-american-dream-is-alive-in-china/ https://palladiummag.com/2019/10/11/the-american-dream-is-al... This progress should not be understated. It isn't "they've only managed to do a little bit worse than 30 years ago", it's the freak'n biggest endeavour in human history! Think about: if China is so bad, why do hundreds of millions of Chinese travel abroad every year, and why does nearly everybody return willingly? Heck, why do I still visit China? What has Beijing concretely done so far? For the past year, people have been yelling non-stop that "soon" Beijing will roll in the tanks, Tiananmen style. That never happened. During the only time the People's Liberation Army headed out of their barracks, they were off-duty — not wearing their uniforms — and all they did was clearing roadblocks placed by rioters. Am I saying China is a utopia? By no means. China has many problems. But the depiction of western media of China as some sort of dystopian hellhole, is incorrect. Back to secessionism. Why do some people want to secede? One reason is because they've been fed a lie about China: that it's a backwards, dystopian hellhole. Their educational textbooks largely ignore all the progress made in China in the past 30 years. In most recent cases, a primary school test question: "what were the benefits from Japanese invasion to China in WWII?" Can you imagine a text book asking, "what were the benefits from Nazi Germany's holocaust"? The Japanese during WWII were pretty much the Nazis of Asia. With "education" like this, is it any wonder that 80% of the rioters are teenagers? This isn't even a "we are against the CCP, not the Chinese people" thing. Racism against mainlanders is rampant. Some Hong Kongers feel superior to mainlanders, because supposedly Hong Kongers are more "civilized", more "free", etc. Some newspapers openly called mainlanders "locusts": https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-16828134 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-16828134 Some want to secede, because they are indoctrinated to think they are "superior" to mainlanders, not because of any actual, rational interests or policy disagreements. Have a look at this long discussion (warning: 1+ hour) with a guy in Hong Kong who wants to establish a new party that aims to be a middle ground group: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xer6dQlzSSs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xer6dQlzSSs He speaks of the fact that the pro-democracy group rarely actually discusses any, concrete policy disagreements, nor do they propose any useful policy changes. It's all filibustering and obstructing China just for the heck of it. How is any of this freedom? How will this sort of behavior result in a better life for the citizen of Hong Kong? ---- Am I a CCP shill? Am I a bot? Well, have a look at my long Internet history. My Github has been active for 10+ years. Why am I saying all this? Because I can't stand the injustice. Am I defending China? I ask: why does that matter? Isn't truth more important? Am I saying that the Hong Kong people shouldn't ask for more freedom? No, they should be able to. But this should be backed by rationality. At the very least, don't you think it's important to be able to answer the question of what they concretely want to change? What we see today is not rational, nor does it actually improve people's lives. Am I saying China didn't pressure the pope? No. I don't know what's going on there. Do the Hong Kong people agree with what I say here? Well, take a look at this letter from a Hong Kong resident (if you haven't already): https://thefinanser.com/2020/07/am-i-wrong-about-hong-kong.html/ https://thefinanser.com/2020/07/am-i-wrong-about-hong-kong.h... Furthermore, 3 million people signed a petition in SUPPORT of the national security law. https://www.thestar.com.my/aseanplus/aseanplus-news/2020/06/01/nearly-293-million-hk-residents-sign-petition-supporting-national-security-legislation https://www.thestar.com.my/aseanplus/aseanplus-news/2020/06/... Think about it. 3 million signatures: that's more than the number of people who joined the freedom marches. You may be thinking: signing a petition is so easy, so 3 million signatures mean nothing. But think about it: it's a freak'n national security law, who would be so crazy to sign it, no matter how easy it is to sign? But apparently, people are so fed up with the rioters, that they would rather risk supporting this law than to put up with the status quo where there is no security law. Do you disagree with me? If so, I'd love to hear why.

m0zg 6y ago

Such a transparent scam. It's like Disney removing black actor in the Chinese Star Wars poster, while lecturing the US audience on racial justice: https://www.cnn.com/2015/12/08/asia/star-wars-china-racist-poster/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2015/12/08/asia/star-wars-china-racist-p..., or LeBron James carrying water for the Chinese when discussing Hong Kong.

mensetmanusman 6y ago

This falls into the area of ethics under extortion. e.g. consider the act of paying a bribe. Scenario 1: You pay the bribe and make 10x the amount due to faster govt. processing. Scenario 2: You pay the bribe to save someones life who will die otherwise. Paying the bribe in Scenario 1 is immoral and paying in Scenario 2 is moral. Dealing with China is more akin to Scenario 2. The Catholic church is the oldest institution in the world, it knows it can wait.

thinkingemote 6y ago
As the late Terry Pratchett wrote in his book Small Gods, "....the truth is too precious to die for..."
onion2k 6y ago
Given how wealthy and powerful the Catholic church is, and how much the people who run the church would like it to stay that way, I suspect it's not just Scenario 2.
- mensetmanusman 6y ago
  The Catholic church doesn’t globally pool their wealth. “ In 2010, the Vatican had an income of $326 million and ran a $13 million budget surplus, but in 2011 the Vatican ran a $19 million deficit. And while some of that money obviously went to maintaining church buildings and art, much of it also went to charitable causes. Recent re-evaluations of Vatican assets show that the Vatican has approximately $1 billion in total assets. For comparison, Harvard University’s endowment is over $30 billion. So, relatively speaking, the Catholic Church is not really wealthy, and no one blames museums for maintaining their art work and structures. “
  - onion2k 6y ago
    The Vatican owns more than 71,659,919 hectares of land around the world, mostly in prime areas of cities. A single hectare in London is worth 7 or 8 million dollars alone. Then there's the massive amounts of gold, buildings, art, etc on top. I can believe the Vatican itself, as in the tiny city state in Italy, is worth $1bn, but the Catholic Church owns hundreds of billions of dollars worth of assets. If they evaluated it all at just $1bn then they lied.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

nietzschebrod 6y ago

I predict some troubles with his next reincarnation.

morninglight 6y ago

Anyone looking to the Catholic church for moral leadership is living in a fantasy world with no grounding in current reality or historical precedent.

dang 6y ago
No religious flamebait on HN, please.