THE PERSECUTION

Fallacy and Reality    

Concerning ideology, quite a few people maintain that the Socialist State is atheist, and, as a consequence, it opposes the religion. Socialism is synonymous with atheism. Hence, the State of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, led by the  Communist Party, is necessarily atheist; it opposes the religion. and it is the destroyer of religious faiths. The Chief of the State Bureau of Religious Affairs Le Quang Vinh conceded that the Communist State is atheist but  contended that such a remark is only an ill-intended exaggeration founded on deduction without either exactness nor sound base. To say that the religion and socialism don’t meet is baseless. That is not the case: Both socialism and the religion aspire to build  a happy and just society and wish that the good will ultimately vanquish the evil  Socialism struggles to build up the society right on the earth, and the religion, the afterlife in the world beyond.  In the Scriptures, the Lord Jesus affirmed: ”My kingdom is not this world.” (June 18, 36). Thus, between socialism and the religion, there is certainly no common identity, and, neither is there incompatibility. Ho Chi Minh declared: “The Communist Party does not get rid of the religion; it  protects it, instead.” (Nhan Dan, January 27, 1955).

   

The history of contemporary and modern Vietnam proves the reverse. Bloody religious persecutions of the Communist against the religions faiths of Vietnam, Caodaism, Hoa Hao Buddhism, all denominations of the Buddhist Faith, Evangelical Christianity, and the Roman Catholic Church rolled on throughout nearly 30 years under the Democratic Republic of Vietnam during the anti-French Resistance (1945-54), in the liberated North Vietnam (1954-75), and throughout the Socialist Republic of Vietnam ever since 1976.

THE CAO DAI CHURCH

Instances of Persecution

  

For more than three decades after the Communist takeover of South Vietnam, the Cao Dai Church has still lagged far behind other religions in the propagation of the faith. The Church is at an impasse due to somber internal division on one hand, and he State intervention in and control over the internal affairs of the Church on the other. Pressure and violence against the sects that refuse to take side with the State have persisted to the hopelessness of many Cao Dal followers. Efforts on the part of the State were made to incorporate various sects into the State-affiliated Cao Dai Tay Ninh but were in most instances proven futile. In many places, Cao Dai followers identify themselves with the legitimate Cao Dai Church.  Several groups claim themselves independent and practice their religious faith on their own creeds. rites, and rituals. They voluntarily organize sessions of prayers or for union at residential or congressional worship places. The State-affiliated Supreme Administrative Council has failed to unite under its leadership this range of heterogeneous factions.

Control and Harassment

Cao Dai factions that loyally observe the traditional legitimate worship practices suffer strict control of the civil authorities. The Cao Dai sect at Dinh Quan, which was founded in 1969,  as a case in point, has been under constant harassment. Loyally observing the tenets of legitimate Caodaism, it categorically negates the role played by the Tay Ninh Supreme Administrative Council which it considers as illegitimate and undeserving. It has become therefore the target for elimination of the those authorities who side with the council. On November 19, 2008, for instance, these people repeatedly attempted to cause physical damage to their temple at Dinh Quan. To preserve their faith and observe the commandments of  Caodaism, the adepts could only resign themselves to resist with nonviolence. They presented their case to the local authorities who nevertheless turn their blind eye to the matter. With no other means to voice their aspirations, they called  on  fellow followers  in and outside the country for moral and material  to preserve their worship place.

Artful treks are often manipulated to divide various Caudal sects. An incident that widened division between the  various  sects within the Cao Dai Church when news about whether or not the alter of Pope Pham Cong Tac should be moved from Cambodia to the Tay Ninh Holy See reached Cao Dai communities inside the country and abroad. Pope Pham Cong Tac, whose image still lives in the memory of most Cao Dai followers  He was one of the highest dignitary who had made great contributions to the  foundation of the Tay Ninh Holy See, which was inaugurated in 1955. He died while in exile in Cambodia in 1959.  Most Cao Dai communities overseas expressed  their wish and support over  the move of the Pope’s altar to the Holy See approvingly whereas many  others, who mostly live in Tay Ninh and members of the State-affiliated Cao Dai Tay Ninh Sect showed discontent, saying that the Pope was a criminal and not a supreme leader. Still, others thought that the move of the Pope’s altar could only complicate the existing internal division. Furthermore, there has been no religious freedom and independence in Vietnam, the establishment of the altar at the Holy See only proved an awkward accommodation .

On the anniversary of the death of Pope Pham Cong Tac at Tay Ninh Holy See organized by the State-affiliated Cao Dai Supreme Council, May 20, 2011, delegations of various sects of the legitimate Cao Dai Church were prevented from attending the ceremony. Hua Phi, Chairman of the Executive Board of Administration in Lam Dong Province, lamented that his delegation from the Central Highlands and others from the provinces in the South were hindered from joining fellow Cao Dai to pray Cao Dai Supreme for favors due to rude intervention by  the State-affiliated Tay Ninh Supreme Council. Nguyen Bach Phuong, Chairman of the Executive Board of Vinh Long Province, added that about a hundred delegates from the provinces in the Center and the South, Phu Yen, Binh Dinh , Quang Ngai, Vinh Long, Can Gio, and Ho Chi Minh City, Go Cong, Vung Tau, and Phan Thiet were all treated with rudeness at the ceremony. Chaos created a scene of disorder at the negligence of the leaders in the Tay Ninh Supreme Council.  The local authorities denied all charges according to which they themselves were the true instigators that pulled the string behind the scene. 

The conflict between leaders in the Tay Ninh Supreme Council and members in the executive boards of various independent sects of legitimate Cao Dai Church ever deepened.  In most cases, the administration lent support to the Supreme Council. On July 19, 2011, the local authorities decided to take down to the ground the Cao Dai Temple at My Phuong Ward, Phan Rang City. The temple was built in 1951 and has been the worship place of Cao Dai followers ever since. The sect has been  targeted with discrimination after the Communist takeover of South Vietnam, however. In 1987,  for example, while religious rites were being performed the security police came in, arrested three followers, and compelled the faithful  to cede the right to ownership  of the  temple to the civil authorities.  A number of Cao Dai followers were attributed to as hooligans and seized hold of the temple. Cao Dai followers at My Phuong  sent petitions to the city authorities. They received no answer, nevertheless. The  administration seemed to evade the matter in question. A cadre at My Dong People’s Council explained that this was not a land eviction, there had already been agreement between the administration and Administrative Council at Tay Ninh.

     

On May 5, 2012, a large group of local and province security police of Long An Province launched a raid, intimidating the believers at the Cao Dai Temple, in An Hoa Hamlet, An Ninh Tay Commune, Duc Hoa District They warned against them with threats.  This show of power of the police was such that the female follower Nguyen Thi Nu, aged over 60, who got scared, urinating herself involuntarily.

The police burst into the temple but met with strong opposition. The temple guardian Nguyen Thuy Lieu resolutely resisted the admittance. Only until the Cao Dai faithful, at the news of the rude intrusion of police force into the holy place, rushed to the temple did Nguyen Thuy Lieu open the entrance. The police made a search-through inspection without a warrant all through the worship place and found no evidence whatsoever of a fault or crime. They nevertheless ordered Nguyen Thuy Lieu and other members of the sect to leave the worship place on ground that the Caodai faction at An Hoa operated its activities illegally, without authorization from the Head of the Administrative Council Thuong Nhuong Thanh at Tay Ninh.    

   

The Reverend Le Minh Chau, the Head of the Administrative Board of Cao Dai Temple at An Hoa, who was absent from religious services at the time the police operated the search-through inspection  declared  that the Cao Dai faithful at An Hoa dutifully observe the rules and regulations of the Cao Dai Church. He does not know who Thuong Nhuong Thanh is. The  faithful do not trust the man, neither do they  repose their reliance in the head of the administrative council in Tay Ninh. They vow to resist until death to protect their worship place and the Church’s laws , rules, and regulations.  

 

On May 12, 2012, Cao Dai believers in the country and overseas celebrated the anniversary of death of the late Pope Pham Cong Tac. Delegations of Cao Dai dignitaries from  distant regions as far as Lam Dong in the Central Highlands, Binh Dinh, Central Vietnam, and Vinh Long in the plains of Mekong River came in pilgrimage to Tay Ninh Holy Site where the celebration was to be held by members of the Supreme Administrative Council. Hundreds of delegates, however, were targeted with harassment and hindrance from payting respects at the Holy Site and attending the ceremony, especially by guards and members of the State-affiliated administrative council. Petitions by the followers and dignitaries of various factions the Cao Dai Church were sent to the State Office of Reception at 35 Ho Ngoc Lam, Ho Chi Minh City for intervention.

Asked about the incident, Vo Thanh Cong, the vice-chief of the Department of Religions of Tay Ninh Province, declared that there was no such thing as hindrance. Religious activities are now favorable to the followers and performed under guidance of and  in accordance with the regulations of the State.  The authorities of the State Office proclaimed that there undeniably is religious freedom in Vietnam, in spite of a multitude of nefarious incidents of religious persecution as revealed in the reportage of international news agencies, protests of world humanitarian organizations, and acts intervention of personalities and governments worldwide that may take place under any circumstance, at any moment and anywhere in the country.

Review of the Laws on Religion

A delicate question on private land ownership remained unanswered. There was still the absence of a  law concerning the right to found association, hence complicating the question of land entitlement of the religion.  Already, the decree No. 102/L/LOO4 of March 2O, 1954, approved by the National Assembly out of which President Ho Chi Minh signed into law a decree providing the rules for application with articles prescribing liberty of belief and religion. In particular, Articl11e 3 of the said decree specifically facilitates the creation of association that has a legitimate objective, to protect and strengthen the regime , notably the rights to mastership of the people.  It is necessary however, [for an organization] to apply for authorization before creating an association. The regulations concerning the creation will be decreed by the government.” Article 4 says: “The associations that are founded before the promulgation of this law and that are already in operation in the zones temporarily occupied [by the French] during the period of resistance will have to apply for permission to continue their activities.” There was, nevertheless, no clear-cut stipulation whatsoever defining the right to association of  an association. Neither was there a legal framework or statute for an association out of which it could be established and operate in accordance with the law.

The arguments by Le Quang Vinh at the Conference of Bishops presents only a half of the truth.  During the war of resistance that lasted 10 years and the 20 years of the Vietnam War that followed it, in the temporarily occupied regions under French occupation and in the entire South under the Republic of Vietnam, religious organizations were created out of individuals’ initiatives or by religious congregations functioning under the law and without authorization of the civil authorities. There was a separation of rights between the no secular authority and secular authority, a division of authority between the Church and the State. After the unification of the country, all organizations desiring to continue to exercise their rights to religious activities had to apply for authorization of  the revolutionary State, which formality is only normal and comprehensive under the  Communist rule. In the civilized world, the government not only gives the religion the rights to application but also the favor to facilitate this formality. Only can dictatorial regimes give or negate the rights. Similar policy was applied under Fascist dictatorial regimes Under the Nazis, in the occupied countries of Europe, the religions faced dissolution. Almost all independent religious institutions were prevented from operating their activities. Under the Vietnamese totalitarian communism after the war, all independent Churches faced oppression, repression, and elimination. Even “progressive” organizations have to obtain official recognition of the State and operate with hindrance.  (Truing Tan. A Report on Religious Persecution (September 2001)

Le Sung Vinh argued that the situation in Vietnam is complex. It requires a particular strategy. Only those who are trapped because of ruse of the enemies ignore it. This trend helps elucidate the authenticity of the revolutionary character of diverse Church organizations. The State only does the good for all believers, and, thus insists on observing the necessity of  the new procedure of “application for authorization.” As regards the    admission to a convent of prospective novices, Le Quang Vinh declared that the State neither forbids nor restricts the admission to the priesthood. However, the admission to the religious life, in particular, bears a distinctive aspect, which, in one form or another, needs authorization. Article 19 of the Decree 26 states without ambiguity: “The congregation as well as other forms analogous to associations of a collective religious life, in order to be able to function, must apply for authorization and obtain recognition from competent organs of the State. The acceptance of people desiring to enter the religious life must conform to the prescriptions of the Bureau  of Religious Affairs of the government.” The  State initiated the question  of protection of he who enters the religious life.  It guarantees  to the   best interest  protection to the congregation of which the candidate may be a member and the legal condition to the candidate as well. That authorization is also important.  It forbids the admission to religion of those who evade the rigors of the law or accomplishment of their civic duties.

“The arguments Le Quang Vinh brought to the attention of public opinion are mere rhetoric peculiar to the Communist authorities. Everyone knows that right after “the campaigns of dislodging the capitalist compradors” and “dispossession of properties of the bourgeoisie’ in 1975-1976, all Catholic convents in the South were dissolved.  Catholic nuns and novices of the “Covent des Oiseaux,”  Sisters for the Cross, and other regional convents were discharged from humanitarian services and sent home. Catholic-run educational institutions and facilities belonging to the said convents were dispossessed and came under the administration of the State.  Catholic nuns and novices thus reluctantly chose to continue to serve faith had to practice their duties in hiding.  Candidacy to the priesthood of nuns and novices has been negated ever since.  

Formalities imposed on religious activities of congregations and the individuals only serve one purpose: to restrict religions liberty. The Bureau of Religious Affairs is officially entrusted with the authority to control the religion. Following "the liberation of the South", this control  has ever been conducted in such a way that it will only cause the most nuisance to the religious congregations and their aspirants.  Religious freedom is a right, and not a gift. Authorization is without doubt a legal measure that submits the religion more rigorously to the State’s will, its laws, rules, and regulations.  To the Communist  authorities, religious activities in many ways are a hazard to the regime. New religious phenomena as they are happening in the world nowadays are complex and susceptible to destruction, potentially leading to the collapse of a political regime.  There is a must to intervene in them in terms of both pre-dispositions of the laws and security measures. (Thien Nhan. Religious Persecution in Vietnam: Facts and Realities. February 2002)

The Ownership of Land Property and Places of Cult

The dispute between the State and the Church over the ownership of land, property, and  places of cult remains an issue. Le Quang Vinh  argued that  all cultural establishments of the religions (pagodas, churches, temples, basilicas, shrines, sieges of religious congregations, chapels, convents, monasteries, monastic shelters, abbeys, and diverse adjoining constructions such as statues, platforms, steels,  and offices are to be located within  the interior of the places of cult and on a single parcel of land (building lot) . The State  takes into account the question of whether or not a parcel of land can be considered as land belonging to a religion. That is a complex question to which we have to come up with a reasonable solution. No approaches to the issue was mentioned, nevertheless.

    The Law on Land

There exists, in practice,  no legal text regarding religious land. The law on land disposed in Article 1 of the Law on Land stipulates: “Land  belongs to  the property of the whole people. It is the State that manages it homogeneously.  By Article 70, the 1992 Constitution affirms this.  Article 34 of the Civil Code prescribes that cultural establishments of the religion belong to the common property of the community of believers, and they are protected (?) by the State. Thus, it is imperative to understand that the establishments of cult are the property of the community of believers. They are also managed and protected by the State. It  grants the religion the right this category of land, the  property of community of faithful that use it. Legitimately and legally interpreted, those congregations that use the land belonging to the religion have officially received from the government a favor for granted: They are tax-exempt. Those who use that category of land have the right to exchange, cede, rent, bequeath, and hypothecate it. The users of the land. Under the law, they are bound not to violate the law on land by committing themselves to the following infractions, namely, to transfer land by bypass the laws, give  the right of use of land for other purposes foreseen by it, transgressing the law to seize hold of land or transform public land into private land and cede the right of utilization of land contrarily to the stipulation of the law.

The problem of land property then concerns two aspects: the private property or the property of the community or collective property. Land itself is the property of the State. For these reasons, to transform a private habitation and land into cultural religious establishments, that is, to change the objective of use of land and to be in infraction with the actual law and mean to violate the law. However, the religious politics of the State in appearance shows some liberalism on the definition of the right to ownership of the land of the religion. The major imperative in this policy requires that the exchange of land be subject to the decision of the State. The State cannot accept the “fait accompli.” The measure is to  flatten out individual initiative to transform the land of the religion into another category of  land for different use. In any case, the State has all its advantages to mange and control the possession and use of any category of land under the law. In any form, there exists no right to private or collective ownership, or Church land ownership whatsoever under the law (Thien Nhan. Ibid. pp. 10-11)