希望有人為我們解答一個疑題

收到上期《公教報》及《Sunday Examiner》,我看了,有一個疑題;我以為留心的讀者也會發覺到。關於對離任代辦尤蒙席的訪問,《公教報》和《Sunday Examiner》的報導都比較簡短,但答應會在今期(有更多)報導。

關於教廷任命楊主教接班人的程序《Sunday Examiner》這樣報導:「尤蒙席說了:“The process of finding a new bishop started long before the death of Bishop Michael.” “In fact, during his ad-limina visit, Bishop Michael reminded the Holy Father that earlier, there were two auxiliary bishops to assist the bishop, but that now he had only one. Therefore, the process was already on.” 」我覺得把那兩件事連接在一起有些奇怪。

星期一(2月18日)我寫了信給有關兩位編輯。兩位都沒有把信登上今期周報內。《Sunday Examiner》的編輯,星期二寫了一封信給我,我也不明白他所寫的。兩份周報在今期都沒有補充什麼,我怕這疑問被遺忘了,為使發現問題的教友們放心,我看還是把問題公開,為能得到一個公開的澄清。謹將我的兩封信登在這博客上。


Dear Editor,

From the first page of Sunday Examiner (17 Feb) I read that the Most Rev. Mons. Ante Jozic said “The process of finding a new bishop started long before the death of Bishop Michael”, but strangely he related that process to the request made by Bishop Michael to the Holy See for some more auxiliary bishops.

Actually it was reported recently in the media that a consultation was being carried out on the selection of some new auxiliary bishops, besides Bishop Ha, to assist Bishop Yeung. Now, as far as I understand, that consultation has become irrelevant with the death of Bishop Yeung.

A very different consultation is needed for the selection of the new Bishop (full right Bishop of the Diocese).

In the consultation for the auxiliary the opinion of the Bishop is heavily determinant, the auxiliary in given, mainly, to the bishop (the coadjutor, on the contrary is given, mainly, to the Diocese, so the Holy See’s will is much more determinant than that of the Bishop).

Now in question is the selection of the (full right) Bishop of the Diocese, successor to the one who died. Bishop Ha and any other priest may be considered in the consultation (by the way, academic qualification is not even the most important element to be taken in consideration).

My question is: is your report accurate? If so, are my comments correct? Has Mons. Ante an answer to my doubt?

Cardinal Zen

18 February 2019


讀者來信

從《Sunday Examiner》(二月十七日)的報導得知(前)教廷代辦在你們的訪問中說「楊主教逝世前,為他找接班人的程序早已開始了」「因為楊主教曾向教廷要求加多(一位?)輔理主教」。

這樣說法使我愕然。

媒體固然曾傳說前些時教廷正在進行一項諮詢,關於任命(一位?)輔理主教。照我瞭解這項諮詢因楊主教的逝世已毫無意義。

輔理主教是為幫助正權主教,在挑選輔理主教的程序中正權主教的意見份量可以很重(選助理主教時已不同,因為助理主教主要是給教區的,不是給正權主教的,教廷的意願是決定性的)。現在進行的是任命正權主教,需要一個非常不同的諮詢程序。夏主教和許多神父都能在教廷的考慮中(學識或學位也不是決定性的因素)。

我想知道《Sunday Examiner》的報告是否準確(貴報記者也同時在場的)?如果是,那末(前)教廷代辦對我的疑問有何解釋?

陳日君樞機

2019年2月18日


http://sundayex.catholic.org.hk/node/6336

http://kkp.org.hk/node/18283

 

發佈留言

發佈留言必須填寫的電子郵件地址不會公開。 必填欄位標示為 *