Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.
Q: I will be in Shanghai, China, for about a month.
Does the Church allow me to go to the Chinese
state-sponsored Mass and receive Communion?
— T.W., Athens, Georgia
A: Although the situation of the state-approved Church
in China is very complex, a visiting Catholic could
attend Mass and receive Communion there without implying
any particular acceptance of the current unfortunate
ecclesial situation.
The Ecumenical Directory permits Catholics to receive
Communion at the liturgies of Orthodox and other Eastern
Churches not in communion with the Holy See.
These Chinese "official" Catholic Churches, albeit in an
irregular situation, almost invariably desire to be in
full communion with the Holy Father. They usually pray
for him at Mass. And in some cases these Churches have
been recognized in some way or other by both the
government and the Holy See. Hence, it is possible to
receive Communion at Masses in these Churches.
As testified by the Holy Father's May 2007 letter to
Chinese Catholics, the Holy See is actively attempting
to bring about the reconciliation of the Church in China
and to find a way come to an understanding with the
government that will allow it to establish proper
relations with all Chinese Catholics.
Catholics traveling in China should certainly try to
attend a Mass in a community that is in full communion
with the Holy See. Since this is not always possible or
prudent, however, they may choose to attend an "official
Church." But they would not be bound to do so in order
to fulfill their Sunday obligation.
The Church's long history knows several situations in
which pastors and faithful have been forced to choose
between loyalty to the Church and to government policy.
During the French Revolution, for example, all clergy
were obliged by law to take the revolutionary oath of
loyalty to the "Civil Constitution of the Clergy." That
document undermined the Church's independence and
connection to Rome.
A few accepted the oath from revolutionary conviction,
many more out of fear, and others so as not to leave
their faithful deprived of the sacraments in a moment of
crisis and war. There was also confusion from Church
authorities regarding the correct attitude to take,
especially since the changes were primarily disciplinary
and not dogmatic in character.
Those who courageously refused to take the oath accepted
the increasing legal penalties imposed by the state. At
first, there were fines and removal from their dioceses
or parishes. As the revolution descended into terror,
those who refused to swear had to increasingly face
exile, imprisonment and death.
God repaid and vindicated the sacrifice of those who
suffered. The Church in France rose from the ashes of
the Revolution and enjoyed almost a century of growth
characterized by the foundation of numerous new
religious congregations, international charitable
organizations, great missionary zeal, renewed devotion
to the Eucharist and the Sacred Heart, and a wealth of
saintly figures such as the John Vianney, Antoine-Frédéric
Ozanam and Thérèse of Lisieux.
Only God can pronounce final judgment on those who were
weaker. For many the oath was no protection from
revolutionary harshness, and one can be sure that in
many cases the martyrs also died for them and won for
them the grace to repent and return to the path of
fidelity.
While the Chinese experience is only partially similar
and the suffering has been far more protracted, we can
be certain that the salvific logic of the Cross will
once more bear fruit and the sacrifice of those who
remain faithful will not be in vain.