A Legislative Code

Le Quang Vinh, the director of the Bureau of Religious Affairs, argued that those who emitted doubts about such the authenticity of  the laws on religions only proved themselves superficial. They tackled a question beyond their comprehension. The contents of the of the Decree 26 and the Decree 37 are comprehensive and  are consistent. The dispositions of the law servwe the best intersts of all religions and adherents to any religion. Religion is an objective reality of the society whicht everyone has to  respect. According to the latest statistics by the State, the number of adepts of diverse religions in Vietnam is estimated at 15 million, that is, less than one-fourth of the population.  The State serves the best the interests of the believers, but it has at the same time, to meet the needs of the non-believers. The regulations on religious activities are simply the requirements of the law, which situation is common, and, even necessary. Any state, even a capitalist one, must establish the laws for religions. In addition, there are, in our country, numerous different beliefs and religions whose needs are multiple and diverse. Prescribe certain measures, a concrete line of conduct, is necessary, may it be a common orientation. From this necessity, the government has established  the laws on religions. Working in thid direction, it is heading towards compiling a legislative code to be approved by the National Assembly.

The New Religious Policy

     Administrative Measures

     

A priesttt who asked anomymity said that "renovation" had not brought in changes in the religious policy. The State, till showed all intents to place the religions under strict control.  The Director of the Bureau of Religious Affairs, in his address ro the Episcopal Conference of Vietnam (2000) defended the Party's religious policy, praising the  State's approaches to the religious affairs at the Episcopal Conference. His remark was  directly addressed to Cardinal Pham Dinh Tung, President of the Episcopal Conference of Vietnam, and the bishops as follows:

“A year has passed by since the Seventh Reunion of this Conference. Today, the Bureau of Religious Affairs of the government comes to talk with you in this beautiful city of Nha Trang abound with monuments and rich with historical, cultural, and technical achievements. Nha Trang is a city which is seen in progress on the path of wealth and prosperity towards a just and civilized society. I would say my first words on this occasion to wish you all good health so as to guide the Catholic Church of Vietnam on the right path and also my congratulations as regards the total success you have gathered in this assembly.

Gentlemen, 

Last year, the world was shaken with  multiple wars, in Kosovo in Europe, in Afghanistan, in Sri Lanka in Asia, in Africa, and in Latin America. How have so many wars whose motives were moral and religious  broken out?  In our country, there have also been serious incidents of religious character. We  are well aware of those that touched the Catholic Church. At the beginning of the year 1999, a delegation from the “Foreign Affairs” of the Holy See came to Vietnam for negotiation, as we agree to do so every year.  Within one year, five  bishops have been nominted.  In the past, within five years, the same number of bishops had been consecrated. In August, the fete-day to close the year of full indulgence at  La Vang was celebrated in calmness and discipline with the participation of hundreds of thousand of pilgrims. In September, the Episcopal Conference of the United States came to visit the Episcopal Conference of Vietnam. As the civil servants working in the religious domain, we feel great working in that beautiful harmony. The Catholic Church and its organizations, in general, have led a civil and religious life with fervor in a country of peace. 

 Gentlemen,

The State does not cease to ponder on the spiritual and cultural needs of the nation to realize a politics of union of the people, the politics of union of believers and non-believers. Our people practice many religions. According to our statistics, the total number of our compatriots participating in religious activities does not exceed 20 million of people. There exist 50 million of people who don’t participate in any religious activity. The State guarantees the rights to freedom of beliefs and religions as well as the rights to freedom of non-belief and non-religion. It is strictly forbidden to exert discrimination for whatever reason on any belief and religion. There are people who live abroad say that the Socialist Republic of Vietnam is a state directed by the Communist Party and, for that reason, it must be an atheist state. By atheism, they mean intervention, destruction, and limitation. We allow ourselves to answer that such a judgment is issued from a reasoning based on vocabulary terminology and not on the nature of things. Our State came into being along with the foundation of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam,. It had fought all through successive wars, the war of resistance against the French (1945-54) and the war in the South under the direction of the Revolutionary Government, having achieved independence and the liberation of  South Vietnam (from 1976 to the present time).  It has never been an atheist State. If it were an atheist state, why has it not forbidden religious  activities and fostered discrimination against all faiths for reason of belief and religion?

     The State is directed by the Communist Party. However, the                              Party follows the path as enlightened by President Ho Chi Minh “Not only should it not destroy religions, the Communist Party protects them. It only destroys the crimes committed by those who oppress man.” Coming back to the heart of the preoccupations of the State:  The State never ceases to ponder about the means to meet the needs iof the people in matters of religion. It should be remembered that, within two years, the Episcopal Conference has demanded to open a certain number of grand supplementary seminaries. The State has pondered very much on this religious need. We have keenly studied ourselves the needs as suggested by the Conference and  come up with realizable projects for the government to consider. Last year, the Prime Minister granted  permission to openi existing facilities for the establishment of the grand seminary of Ho Chi Minh City which is in the interior of the city. Nevertheless, one year has passed by, no accord from the Cburch concerning this project has been reached. 

     This discord is originated from diverse demands of a divergent subject. The demand for a grand seminary in Ho Chi Minh City turned to be the object of discussion on the 305 m2 space of an  annex establishment to the existing grand seminary, instead. The President of the Episcopal Conference solicited the opening of a new faculty. During the discussion, the bishop of Xuan Loc declared that he did not ask for the creation of a simple faculty, but a grand seminary at Xuan Loc. Today, I would like to inform you  that the Chief of government has given his accord concerning  the opening of an annex establishment of the grand seminary of Ho Chi Minh City at Xuan Loc in the province of Dong Nai. In the second place, you have demanded to organize pilgrimages, to participate in the celebration of the Saint Year at the Holy See in the Holy Land.  Again, we would like to inform you that  the government has given approval, and we ask you to proceed with the formalities for visas. Another central point is the question of publication of the bulletin    Communion. As regards this matter, we would like to inform you that, in principle, the Chief of Government has already given his accord. We ask you to specify the objectives and the type  of diffusion of this publication in a concrete manner, and  to submit application to competent agencies for consideration. Thus, I would like to ask the secretary-general of the Conference to fill in the necessary formalities and send them to us (the Bureau of Religious Affairs of the government), specifying more details, particularly, the objectives of this demand, and the mode of diffusion  of this internal bulletin as said in the letter of solicitation and during the assembly of the Episcopal Conference.     

Now, I would like to talk about the so-called “Appeal of the Religions for Religious Freedom in Vietnam” by some people who pretend to represent the religions and who, without shame, demand that “the Article 4 of the Constitution, the Decree 26 on religious activities, and the letter of application 01/99 published on July 16, 1999 be ignored, and that the legal status of the religions that had existed before 1975 be restored." These demands are rejected by the realities of daily life, and even by you, the leaders of a religion.I would like to speak about it in a comprehensive report. In reality,       the  Decree 26 enlarges the sphere of freedom for the religions while the Decree 69 only retaffirms the freedom of faith. This new decree states clearly the warranty of freedom of belief and religion. Beliefs belong to the domain of conscience, of sentiment, and of thought. Religions reveal a much larger domain, adducing activities and structures. The Decree 26 contains new regulations concerning religious activities and organizations. It lays emphasis on the protection that the law and State bring forth for them.  At this point, people would ask me how they will be free when they  are tied to authorization. The authorities of religious affairs have answers directly adressed to a critic embedded in the general considerations in a letter submitted to the government, in which the requirement for demand and authorization is put into question (EDA 299). The fact is, by inciting freedom of action from request for authorization, one is only deprived of many very precious advantages of protection. The fact of soliciting authorization of the State does not cary anything abnormal.

 

 Now, we confront the problems of entering the monastic life and  applying for authorization. Why is it that the State does not forbid one to practice a monastic life?  One is allowed to live a monastic life, but one must practice it in conformity with the dispositions of the law. Article 19 of the Decree 26 affirms without ambiguity that “the congregations of religions that are capable to function must ask for authorization and obtain recognition from competent organs of the State.”  The approval for people who desire to enter the monastic life will be accorded in conformity with the prescriptions ascribed by the Bureau of Religious Affairs. The State disposes of protection for those who enter the monastic life. Most of all, for  religious congregation, it guarantees the legal  status of the prospective priest. The State does not grant admission to the convent to those novices who evade the  rigor of the law or who want to  evade  their duties. The administrative civic formalities require of religious congregations  and candidates to the monastic life to fulfill these objectives of protection. The Bureau of  Religious Affairs is implementing these formalities so that they will not constitute inconveniences to the congregation or the candidate. However, the absence of all applications for authorization is unacceptable.

          

Let’s go back to the question of ideology that entangles the State and the religion. Certain people think that socialism and atheism are synonyms. This type of argument is reasoned without foundation. Most people think that the methodology of religion, on one side, and, socialism, on the other, are different. One is spiritualism, the other, materialism. Such things are methodologies, but their finalities and the objects derived from their methodologies are the same (?). If we trace back to the origins of religions, we will perceive that the object of belief and religion is the other world while socialism advocates the need for change of scientific society and  the change of State by society, actually at a higher level where oppression of man by man will be eliminated. In reality, between socialism and religion, there is  no convergence, but there is incompatibility. Article I of the Decree 26 has this phrase: “All discriminations for reasons of belief and religion are strictly forbidden.” To whom is destined this strict interdiction ? I think that it aims at isolating those who practice religious services vile political schemes (?). The State upholds an interdiction that concerns itself : That is the impartiality of our State.

 

 Being the manager of society, the State intervenes in two types of matters, showing its responsibility and power, the juridical and political matters. The State does not discuss the problems that concern the world of the other side, those questions that are purely religious and that belong to theology and belief. It does not criticize religion. The State is content to protect the religion against evil use of it, and for no benefits other than those that best serve the religion itself. The Decree 26 is only the first stage on the path of edification, of achievement, and of perfection of the judiciary system of the State in the domain of religion. It is then normal that there are deficiencies. The Decree 26 will be completed and perfected and will be elevated to the rank of an order and the law for religions. The citizens all have the rights to contribute with their positive opinions to the improvement and perfection of the law for religions. As for those who present extreme requests by demanding. for example, that the regime in rigor before 1975 be restored, as well as, it seems, to reverse our country back to the war and detour our society from normality. Neither our compatriots of diverse religions nor our society can approve of those extremist demands."

Ideological Premises

Within the context of renovation the Directive No. 37/CT-TG on religions, the Communist Party and State could not dissimulate worries about the rising dissent among diverse religious circles, especially various Buddhist sects operating in Hue, The administration apparently sought to soothe stubborn opponents.  Among other things, it eulogized: “Beliefs and religions are spiritual needs of part of the population.” In a sense, it recognizes the legitimacy of religion.  A religion is an organization that  belongs to the people, comes from the people and works for the people. It is the spiritual med of the people. That is the concept of Ho Chi Minh thought, of one of the ideological tenets the Communist Party the State have ever cherished.  The Directive reminded the fact that right after the proclamation of independence on September 2 1945, President Ho Chi Minh cited, among other pressing needs, the urgent  task is to solidify national union, to unite  the believers and non-believers. President Ho Chi Minh had declared: “The colonialists and landlords practiced a politics of division separating our compatriots of beliefs from those of non-beliefs, to be able to govern our people more aggressively. He suggested to the government to proclaim the right to liberty of beliefs and the union of the believers and non-believers. Ho Chi Minh. Complete Works, Vol. 4, pp. 8-9). That orientation from the directive, in the views of the authorities, has been applied in the unanimity and in conformity with various changing circumstances. Therefore, the Vietnamese Communist Party and State have repeated numerous directives and enacted multiple decrees in order that this orientation be put into practice, suitably and effectively.

    The Control    

To anticipate questions and objections, the directive consolidates its position, arguing that he management of religious activities, the State, has its objectives which cadres should achieve to guarantee the legitimacy pertaining to the liberty of belief and religion as well as the liberty of non-belief and non-religion of the people.  But, the State at the same time ought to maintain public order and have authority over the religions to prevent evil doers from taking advantage of the religions and abusing the rights to liberty of religion to sabotage national integrity. The history of diverse nations and the history of Vietnam as well have proven this. The believers of diverse religions also know this.  Save for the enemies that maliciously use religion as a means to defame the sacred character of religion and discredit the authenticity of religious faith. The fight against evil doers who use  religion for illicit purpose is then an urgent need. It is equally  a pressing task of the cadres and all true believers as well.

  

To achieve this objective, the Directive 37 of the Politburo stressed that the government would bring in complements to all existing decrees. It would then prepare an executive order on the religion and presented it  to the Permanent Committee of the National Assembly for promulgation. This order would serve as the compass for the management of all religions, thus creating favorable conditions for the legal functioning of religious activities. It was in the spirit that the government promulgated the Decree 26 of April 19, 1999 whose main objective was to complete the Decree 69/ HDBT of 1991 which would  nevertheless remain in force while awaiting the promulgation of the new legislation on religions.  

This new law, to the observer, was essentially a move towards establishing a more elaborate law on religions, prepared by the State Bureau of Religious Affairs and nominally adopted by the National Assembly.  The hope for a real and true law for  religions nevertheless remained a dream. As usual, no sooner had an old law been abrogated than  a new one of the same nature came into being.

    

Remarks

The Decree 26/1999/ND-CP, the authorities believed, reflect perfectly the spirit and thought as regards religion of Ho Chi Minh expressed in his speeches in September 1945 when the country entered the period of national reconciliation and the Communist Party sought to calm down religious leaders to build national union in face of foreign aggression.  In a soothing tone, the six-point directive of the Politburo heightens the respect for and guarantee of liberty of religious belief and non-belief, into a solid union under the Party’s leadership  to  accomplish their civic tasks, to protect the interests of the Vietnamese socialist  fatherland, maintain independence and national suzerainty. The Communist administration again,  guarantees a legal status for the believers. The cultural and moral values of religion are respected and promoted.

The promises of the State are nevertheless unconvincing. In the fact place, they are mere empty promises.  The believers were fully aware of the two-edged twist of words the State always devises to  veil its hidden intention. People would easily get trapped and fall prey to its vile schemes. This intention is self-evident as the Party admonished with warnings and threats the believers right in this directive with these terms: “the dealings of evil doers that lie under the cover of religious activities, endanger public order, cause harm to national independence. sabotage the politics of national union, that  oppose the Party and State of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, that infringe on moral values and the ways of life and culture of the nation, and that alienate the clergy and the faithful from civic duties. These evil-doers all will be judged according to the law. Superstitions will be criticized and eliminated (2nd part, Article 5).

The Decree 26/1999/ND-CP renews the ideological interpretation expressed in other preceding directives and laws on religions.. Compared with the Decree 69 of 1991,  there is no real novelty that could be found in the Decree 26. The political nature of the two decrees is virtually the same. The difference is that many articles in the latter decree are more specific. Democratic liberty in it is defined clearly, and the responsibilities vested in the State are prescribed with concrete substance.  Article 1 of the Decree 69 states:  “The State guarantees the liberty of belief and the liberty of non-belief of the citizen.” But, Article 1 of the Decree 26 adds the word “religion” : “The State of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam guarantees liberty of belief and religion as well as the liberty to belief or non belief or non-religion pf the citizen.”

Distinction between Belief and Religion  

Belief belongs to the domain of conscience, of sentiment, and of thought. Religion belongs to a much more vast domain, comprising activities as well as the physical structures. The Decree 26 thus contains new dispositions concerning religious activities and organizations. Beyond its precepts as regards belief and religion, the State assured the religion  the protection of the law. Article 8 specifies that “The religious organizations whose ideals of life aim to realize religious orientations and whose rules of organizations are in conformity with the laws those that are authorized to function by the chief of government or the Bureau of Religious Affairs and are protected by the law.” Article 2 affirmed: “The State protects the places of cult of religious organizations.” There are still other articles of the  Decree 26 that imply the basic principle according to which the State and the law will protect and guarantee the liberty of religious activities and facilities of the religion within the framework of the State and the law.

Prior authorization for religious activities are nevertheless necessary., Le Quang Vinh, the Chief of the State Bureau of Religious Affairs argued that, considering the real meaning of the term “liberty,”  there is practically no contradiction between liberty and application for authorization. In the world, there exists no country in which the authorities tend to eliminate the procedure of application for authorization. That formality, on the contrary, helps to differentiate what is legal from what is illegal. Therefore, the State exercises general rules of law  to protect, guarantee, and defend the legality of the authorization process. When you apply for authorization, you are protected.  Do not apply for authorization is to reject a very precious right, the right to be protected. Thus, is there anything abnormal in the act of applying for authorization ?

Reactions from the Catholic Conference of Bishops

The Decree 26/1999/ND-CP met with resolute reaction from the highest Catholic clergy. In its letter of communication to the government, the Episcopal Conference of Vietnam expressed its opinions as regards the Politburo’s directives concerning the religions. Before that, during its annual convention in October 1999, the bishops had publicly pronounced that they could not keep silent on the two latest government legal documents since they triggered discontent in diverse religious milieus of the country. A letter of communion was issued after that although the Bureau of Religious Affairs suggested that the affairs be buried. The authorities contested that the intervention on the part of the bishops in a form of a letter with its considerations should be expressed through open communication, instead and that this communication should be transmitted to the competent authorities.

The letter is entitled “General Considerations of the Vietnamese Episcopal Conference as regards the Decree 26/1999/ND-CP of April 19, 1999 to the Government,” It was dated October 16, 1999, the last day of convention of the Episcopal Conference of Vietnam. The directives of the Politburo evidently holds a firm position as regards religions and religious politics as well. The viewpoints of the Episcopal Conference in the letter of communication are not much less resolute. and, thus, must not be ignored. It was nevertheless a hard-fought encounter on the part of the bishops. At intervals, the bishops expressed their solidarity with other religious congregations of the country. Prior to the conference, the Cardinal President of the Episcopal Conference had hesitated to sign the appeal to the civil authorities. He had to wait until the October Episcopal convention when the bishops adopted an attitude on this subject.  Files and documents with evidence in the areas of education, culture, and charitable works were well instituted. In the same way, the general attitude of the authorities towards the religions and the society, in general, should be put  under consideration before a final draft was executed.

     

Summarizing, the letter attested the facts that 1. Many people of diverse religions feel the same impression, as it is known, that, in the domain of religious freedom, the Decree 26 `is not an aperture but a shutter [to religious freedom; 2. Many articles of the decree, instead of creating favorable conditions for religious activities, intentionally foster complications  and difficulties; 3. The Decree 26 bars the way to the establishment  of the legal bases that allow the religions to contribute to the building and development of the country, particularly in the fraternal and spiritual domains, closing doors to all efforts of the religions to extend their social works. By appropriating the properties and confiscating their lands, forbidding, until the present time, the Catholic Church to acquire land, the State practically debarred  the politics of privatization of the State (EDA 297). and  4. The Decree 26, fails to create favorable conditions for the religions to contribute to the enhancement of the democratic spirit in the administration of the State and implementing the organs of the State to effectively carry out  the functions of the State to the service of the people.The system of administration of religious affairs compels the responsible of the Church to perform religious duty in a position that is similar to that of a perpetual beggar.     

Reactions from Religious Circles to Resolution 24

    

To the outside observers, the Resolution No. 24 of the Communist Party, which was issued after the Sixth Congress, and the new directive of the Politburo did not reflect the true situation of and solution to the question of religion. In addition to implementing the existing administrative regulations, the Communist Party arbitrarily adopted other rigid measures to abort  possible opposition from the religions. Plans for action for cadres at all levels of the Party hierarchy were devised to carry out political schemes. The Party, in effect, was cautious in its intention but failed to dissimulate its artful scheme to subordinate the religions to submission to its established order. Cadres were instructed to be on guard against potential confrontation with the elements who the Party thought would use religion to destabilize the socialist regime politically. At the same time, it heighten vigilance against the covert and ever-lasting opposition of the religions on the ideological plane. Weaknesses of the administration in dealing with the religions were also mentioned, and, as a matter of fact,  particular attention should be focused on evil tendency. Party cadres must be alert to execute programs of action and correctly implemented them since the coordination between the responsible of various services in this domain were still lax, and the methods to solve the difficulties were somewhat incoherent.  Still, there was  lack of a comprehensive understanding of the problem and loose union in  the conduct of affairs. The distinctions in viewpoints as regards religions between diverse political, cultural and social organizations remained wayward.  Amid complex difficulties, staffs and cadres working in the domain of religion were still a small number. They were even poorly educated and professionally weak. Diverse services at all levels were not really conscious  of their responsibilities. Even more, they were not keenly aware of the objectives in this domain.  Hence, more tasks were to be done. One of them was to prepare a new law in response to the new situation     

The Decree 26/1999/NDCP

The Decree on Religions 26/1999/ND-CP signed by Prime Minister Phan Van Khai in April 1999, reaffirms the rules and regulations on religious activities applied since the 1950’s and, with some additional clauses, tightens  the control of the State on the religions. Under this Decree, all religious properties confiscated by Communist authorities after 1975 become the permanent property of the State. Government agencies are empowered to recognize the legality of a religion,  the appointment of religious dignitaries, and the the privilege to publish religious materials. All subjects concerned are subject to the Prime Minister’s approvals. Priests and religious officials under “administrative detention” are not permitted to assume religious functions. All activities believed to activate" opposition to the State” or “go against the healthy culture of the nation” will be severely punished. The State Bureau of Religious Affairs, the ominous interpreter of the Decree, will issue instructions concerbing the applications for permission and approval.

Article 1 of the Decree 26/1000/ND-CP provides candidly: “The State of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam guarantees the liberty of belief and religion as well as the liberty to adhere or not to adhere to a religion. Any discrimination for reason of belief or religion is strictly forbidden.”  Article 4 of the Decree 26/1999/ND-CP stipulates: “Religious activities accomplished in the interest of the faithful are protected when these interests are legitimate and comply with the law. Religious activities accomplished in the interest of the fatherland and people are encouraged.” Article 5 of the same decree further stipulates: “All activities causing harm to the liberty of belief and religion, any activity utilizing belief and religion to oppose the State of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, prevent the believers to accomplish their civic duties, sabotage the union of the whole people, encounter the sane culture of our nation and engender superstitious practices will be sanctioned in conformity with the law.”

The decree stresses that, as  the manager of the society, the State only intervenes in matters that are within its responsibility and competence and in conformity with the law and policy of the State. The State does not interfere in the matters  that are purely religious and the matters that are theological.  Primarily, it protects religion. It opposes the use of religion as cover for illicit purposes as well as superstitious practices. All progressive States in the world do the same thing. Thus, in conclusion, the government firmly assured the public of the credibility of the law. The Decree 26/1999/ND-CP is a step forward, the first phase in the process that allows everyone to build, improve and complement the juridical system of the State.  The Decree 26 itself will be a perfect  complement to a future order and a prospective legislative code.  This action is essentially correct. It is opene to the path of a good will uniting the religion and the State within the framework of building the country. One may find in it some natural insufficiencies. Remedies will nevertheless be made all along the process of application. of the law. (EDA 303).

Remarks

The Decree 26/1999/NDCP of the government came into existence as a result of growing tension between the government and the Churches. It aims to implement the existing laws on religion,  performing in emergency one of the crucial tasks, preventing popular opposition from the religion as foreseen by the Politburo. Pitfalls surfaced, however, as the State, again, made erroneous ideological judgments on the social nature and political character of the religion. In fact,  right in the first part of the legislation,  for instance, the decree does not specify the legal requirements a religion must meet. Rather, it imposes intricate interpretations and twits of equivocal lexical terms, instead. In Article 5, in particular, the lexicon “associations,” which is used to designate “Churches,” is vague and confusing. It is first defined positively in paragraph 1, and negatively in paragraph 5, respectively. Religious organizations, under the new law, must be authorized to operate under the law by the chief of government.  Religious goals, practices, and activities, which are practically theogical, must comply with rules and regulations of the law. Only if these requirements are met, “ will they  be protected by the law, if not, they have to stop to function.” These “provisions” are not the prescriptions of a law. They are merely the rules and regulations the religion must observe.

Still, the instructions in the application for authorization for a new religion of July 1999 further stresses that operative religious organizations must meet the legal requirements as stated in the directives of the Politburo on July 18, 1988. The directives specifically emphasize the “illegality” of certain religious activities, such as the activities that are practiced outside the places of worship or the activities that operate in contradiction with the ultimate interests of the country, and, especially, the activities that are superstition-tainted and activities “that must be criticized and eliminated.” Such activities are, in effect, not clearly defined, thus causing disturbance and nuisance to the observer of the rules and regulations of the law.

The imperatives that mark the directives of the Politburo and the rules and regulations provided by the said decree do not always match. The directives, it is noted, don’t particularly mention anything about the kind of religions practices or activities of any Churches, legal and illegal.  As regards religious activities, the Decree 26  prescribes only one general disposition in Article 3: “Religious activities must be conducted in conformity with the legislation of the State of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.”  What would be a religious activity that is considered to operate suitably to  the ;aw of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. And, an activity like this is not clearly defined in the said law or any other law on religion of the Socialist State of Vietnam.

RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION IN THE MODERN ERA

Overview

During the eleventh session of the National Assembly, April 7, 1997, Deputy Phan Khac Tu, a Catholic priest and State’s “protégé,” came up  with the theme of civil liberties. His speech, which was published in its entirety in the Catholic review Catholicism and the Nation (No. 1104, May 4, 1997), devoted all the last part to the application of the politics of religious freedom. The deputy particularly criticized the gross manner with which certain regional authorities had executed with regard to the policy: “The applications depend on the manner in which the rule is interpreted, mostly on the whims and wishes of diverse services, regional authorities, and the cadres in this specialized domain. Twenty years after reunification of the  country, no uniformity of application of the rules has been applied, as far as religious freedom  is concerned.”     

    

The compilation of a new law as regards religious policy constituted a primary concern of the Eighth congress that took place in June 1996. Special considerations were given to the compilation of a new law for the religion with well-defined provisions. Expert compilers were entrusted with the task. The keynote presenter from the Politburo nevertheless kept a complete silence on a promulgation of the coming law. In his presentation before the congress, the presenter even showed himself  discreet. The religion constitutes a factor and also an impediment to socialist buildup. The presenter seemingly thinned out the issue in certain aspects. To the observer, the term religion, for instance, was used but sparingly in his speech; it was later mentioned without clear-set definition in Chapter VII entitled “Accentuate the Reinforcement of the Unity of the People on the whole.” This caution on the part of the presenter constituted a negative attitude of the State toward the religion; it suggests some significance of an ill omen to a concerned observer  (EDA 226).

The Catholics, in general, expected the government, after years of hard time would eventually relax its control on the religion, Attempts were made to revive activities of religious groups in various parishes rekindled new hope. Within a short time, all initiatives of voluntary will of this kind proved to be futile, however.  For the diocese of Xuan Loc, as a case in point, the local authorities flatly repressed suspected troublemakers, placing them under house arrest. A report in 1997 from  a parish in Dong Nai Province recounted that, while in a meeting, members of the Catholic Mothers received a visit of the police for unspecified reason. The president of the association was then convoked for interrogation at the police headquarters. The authorities of the province of Dong Nai, in another instance, raised question on and probed into the existence of several religious councils of parishes in  the diocese of Xuan Loc,  Dong Nai Province.

Curiously enough, while, in the Dong Xoai Parish, Saigon Diocese, where the State-affiliated member of the Committee of Union of Catholics Phan Khac Tu was the vicar, activities of all forms were performed without approbation from the authorities of the city,  In truth, for many years, the parishes in Xuan Loc suffered suppression. The authorities of Dong Nai Province pronounced the dissolution of all Catholic associations in the Xuan Loc diocese. As a result, beginning in April 1997, conflict between the local authorities and the parishioners ever  intensified. The diocese is a large congregations of Catholics the majority of whom came from North Vietnam after the Geneva Agreements in 1954 and was well-known for anti-Communist action. 

Tension persisted. In August 1997, The State tightened control, fomenting discontent of the local Catholic population. Tension escalated to such an extent that the Politburo had to send to  the diocese of Xuan Loc one of its members, Pham The Duyet, the Head of the Office of People’s Actions. Pham was appointed the politics mediator representing the Politburo to settle the complication between the population and the local administration in the riot in Thai Binh Province previously. Upon his coming to the  diocese of Xuan Loc, he met with Bishop Nguyen Minh Nhat and his coadjutor, Nguyen Van Tran, and some other priests. The meeting between the two parties, according to the local sources, was short and comic. 

At the outset, the friction between the local authorities and the prelacy of Xuan Loc  began with the publication of a brochure entitled “Guidelines for Parochial Activities of the Parish Council” by the diocese of Xuan Loc.  He act was to the t authorities an infringement on the law of the State. The  People’s Council of Dong Nai sent to its subordinate district people’s councils  a circular with remarks and directives on the subject, specifying that the brochure was published without permission and that its contents  were erroneous and were in contradiction with the actual regulations of the State concerning the legal status of the diocese as a social association, in general, and as a religious entity, in particular.  It blamed the bishop of the diocese for reorganizing the diocese in contradiction to the law. The orientations in the brochure were attributed  to as mistakes repeatedly committed, first, by the former bishop of the diocese, Msgr. Lang, who had signed the common letter of 1981, then by personal engagement in the publication of the said 00brochure of Bishop Nguyen Minh Nhat  

    

Substantially, the circular accused the Bishop of Xuan Loc of forming religious organizations which were not qualified for religious ones. These organizations, in reality, are simply religious associations operating in conjunction with and under the supervision of the Church’s clergy in the domain of fraternity such as the Alliance of Sacred Heart, the Legio of Mary, the Association of Heads of Families, the Catholic Mothers, the Eucharist Crusade, and so on. They are simply the religious groups of the Church that operate within the Church and under the supervision of the clergy. The bishop was also blamed for having reshaped the Church's organization, creating milieus of activities for the youth, and placing their supervision of a Church committee chaired by a priest or a lay person. The status of these organizations of new groups had not been prescribed in the organization program for ordinary religious practices. 

      

To adorn what is considered as a serious deviation, the circular of the People’s Council of the province of Dong Nai announced a number of measures. The most important one dictated the dissolution of all movements, organizations, and milieus. The new measures evinced a strong emotion among the Catholic population of the diocese. Discontent was manifest at the meeting between Pham The Duyet and the  Catholics. This member of the Politburo tried to appease the audience’s anger, promising to facilitate a peaceful dialogue between the authorities and the Catholic community. The Catholic side demanded with firmness that the problem in question be solved and the decisions adopted by the local authorities be revoked.

Message from U. S. Catholic Conference of Bishops

Bishop Daniel P. Reilly, Chairman of the U .S. Catholic Conference on Internal Policy, on September 15, 1994, released a statement of the Committee on religious freedom in Vietnam which is as follows:

“On February, third of this year, President Clinton, ended the United States trade embargo against Vietnam, making another milestone in the long and painful journey from the devastation of war  toward greater contact and mutual understanding. As we welcome this change of policy on the part of our government, we wish also to note the areas of our  special concern  with regard to Vietnam, particularly the matter of religious freedom in that country and the still  unsettled fate of thousands of refugees.

         

In our 1989 pastoral statement on relations  between the United States and Vietnam, “A Time for Dialogue and Healing,” we affirmed the solidarity between the Church of Vietnam and that of the U. S., emphasized our concern for  religious liberty, and said “it  is time to move beyond the legacy of war, to begin to respond to the pressing needs of those affected by that war, and to address  better both the problems and possibilities of a new relationship between the American  and Vietnamese peoples”. We renewed the appeal made on December 2, 1975 by the leadership of our Conference and other religious bodies that  the trade embargo be lifted as soon as possible. Now, after nineteen years, a more equitable relationship may be possible, but serious challenges remain.

       

The issues that have governed relations between our two countries over those years have centered largely on the geopolitical role played by Vietnam, chiefly with regard to Cambodia , and the abiding concern of the American people for full accountability of our POWs and MIAs. The Cold War concerns have failed  and most agree that Vietnam has been generally forthcoming on the POW/MIA issue, with prospects for still greater cooperation enhanced now by ending the sanctions.

        

Less attention has been given to the question of the religious rights of the Vietnamese people and specifically to the ability of the Catholic Church to function freely As in several other countries in our time, the Vietnam Communist Party’s control over and hostility to religious belief and practice was exceedingly harsh in the years immediately following the war. By all accounts, the present situation, while less than satisfactory, may represents one improvement over the previous period.

Maryknoll, begun to work in Vietnam and five of the country’s seminaries, with a variety of limitations, were allowed to reopen.

   

"Yet, serious restrictions on religious practices remained intact," a priest who asked anonymity said.."  Our concerns about religious liberty begin with each own family of faith, but they do not end there. Recent crackdowns on religious groups have tended to be directed  most directly at members of the Unified Buddhist Church, and against the evangelical house church movement, and are just as objectionable as the restrictions imposed on the Catholic Church. Government efforts to interfere with the Catholic Church's internal affairs. It is neither the function of the State to approve or withhold approval for candidates to the priesthood, nor to restrict  a bishop’s freedom to name his pastors or transfer priests should clergy be restricted  from traveling freely within his diocese. just to perform his ministry. It is up to the Church to run its own affairs, to nominate bishops, to receive student-priests without government interference. "

The Vatican and Hanoi

At the end of 1990, a Vatican delegation, headed by Cardinal Roger Etchegaray, representing both the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace and “Cor Unum,” paid an official visit to Vietnam. In that same year, some 21 of the Vietnamese bishops (most and not all bishops of the conference) were permitted for the first time to make their “ad ilimina” visit to the Holy Father, following   “a dialogue which augurs well for the future has begun,. ,,,” as the Pope said to the bishops in Rome in a meeting.  Talks between the Holy See and the Hanoi continued during the visit to the country of  another Vatican  delegation  led by Msgr. Claudio Celli  of the Holy  Secretariat  of State in early 1992 and again just this year, and a visit by Vietnam officials to the Vatican in 1992. In both instances, the National Conference of Catholic Bishops  of Vietnam presented to the Prime Minister  the restrictions imposed on them  forth and the still-existing problems facing the Church, urging  him to remedy the situation.

   

The Holy See had, just this year, concurrently named  bishop of Hanoi archbishop and appointed several other dignitaries bishops. However, there still remained an unacceptable degree of  government interference in  the  nomination and appointment. The nominee or appointee  must meet certain sine-qua-non requirements established bf the authorities.. As Msgr. Celli said, by reluctantly accepting State decision on the matter, the Church saw  its deprivation of the desire to nominate bishops on its terms" "The international documents on religious liberty affirm that every religion has a right to freely designate its own ministers.” Nevertheless, Hanoi Shows some signs of tolerance. Several of the arrested clergy had been released,, among whom Fr. Dominic Tran Dinh Thu, founder of the Congregation of Mother Co-Redemptrix, and four other priests of the congregation. Some relaxation was felt in humanitarian services. Mother Theresa of the Missionaries of Charity and the Catholic Foreign Mission Society,   

In a two-column article in the magazine “Thirty Days,” published in Rome, in January 1992, Gianni Valette reported news on a visit of a Vatican delegate to Vietnam. It consisted of Mgr. Claudio Celli and Mgr. Nguyen Van Phuong. The two Vatican officials met with Vietnamese high-ranking officials. The meetings were described as "intimate and friendly." However, the Vietnamese Catholic circles were doubtful of such a “smile policy” by the State. They were afraid that it was only a tactic in its strategy to "make peace" with the Vatican while seeking opportunities to ingeniously place docile Catholic priests in important positions in the Roman Catholic clerical hierarchy.  Pursuing this purpose, the State nominated Huynh Cong Minh, the pastor of the Saigon Main Cathedral and former leader of the Association of “Patriotic” Catholics, the representative of the Saigon prelacy. Apparently, Huynh Cong Minh was no longer a member of the Executive Board of the Communist-installed Committee for Solidarity of Catholics whose task was to help the Vietnamese Communist Party and State, to campaign, seeking support from the Catholics to carry out the Party's policy. Huynh Cong Minh, in reality, was then the key decision-maker representing the Party beside the Church's clerical hierarchy. Huynh' s pronouncements in many instances were thought to acts covert intrigue benefiting the authorities. To warn against deviations from priestly duties and performances, in 1992, Cardinal Sodano, Minister Plenipotentiary of the Vatican, sent a letter to the Bishops of Vietnam reminding them of a religious law that prohibits Catholic priests to participate in political organizations and asked them to find ways to withdraw from the State-installed Committee for Solidarity of Catholics.

       Religious Intolerance

Religious practices  in Vietnam is riddled with restrictions. This gives rise to many problems simply because of the State religious intolerance, which is pervasive in  all sectors of life. In an interview with the Vietnamese newspaper Ngay Nay (Today), published in Houston, Texas, during his accompaniment with Pope John Paul II at the Eighth Conference of the World Catholic Youth in Denver, Colorado, August 11-15, 1993, Cardinal Angelo Sodano said that the Vietnamese government needed to translate into reality the basic rights to freedoms:. He stressed that  “ to speak of the rights to freedom in Vietnam is to speak of the basic human rights. The Government of Vietnam is a signatory to international treaties and covenants pledges to  abide by the international clauses on human rights. Thus,  it needs to carry them out. When the Holy Father calls for the rights to freedom, he calls for freedom for every human person, and not only for the Catholics. Let's hope and pray for Vietnam. The Vatican would do to help the Roman Catholic Church of Vietnam to claim back its establishments, cathedrals, schools, and so on, which have come into possession of the Communist administration.  The Vietnamese government already gave signs of greater understanding of the demand for the freedom of the Church. We only demand for freedom of religion. We do not demand these rights for the Catholics but for believers of all religions, for the people of Vietnam. I believe that every community has the rights to religious freedom and religious practices.  The Catholic Church of Vietnam needs to have freedom in organizing seminaries, receiving and forming its priests according to its standards. Sooner or later, these rights should be recognized by the Vietnamese government."

Uneasiness

Uneasiness marked the preparations for the visit to Vietnam by Mugs. Alberto Ablondi during August 11-17, 1994. The prelate was then the Bishop of Livourne, Italy, and President of the Catholic Biblical Federation. It was with these two titles that enabled the bishop to make the visit. The biblical association of which he was the president had  contributed to the publication of the most recent Vietnamese translation of the New Testament. He had been invited to a reception organized for public presentation of the biblical work in Saigon.  On this occasion, he wished to personally meet the seminarians from North Vietnam of the diocese, particularly the two recipients of the scholarship accorded by the faithful of Livourne. At first,, the Embassy of Vietnam in Italy refused to give the prelate an entry visa to Vietnam under the pretext that he was a devotee of "religious propaganda." However, after many negotiations , he was accoded authorization to enter Vietnam. The Vietnamese authorities nevertheless complicated the matter when he arrived in Vietnam. (EDA. November 1, 1994)

      .

     In an interview with the Vatican Radio on his return from Vietnam, the prelate gave his impressions on his visit when replying to a question on the religious situation in Vietnam as follows:

"The religious situation in Vietnam may well be summarized in terms of the celebration in which we participated --a great ceremony that was organized by the archdiocese at the living room in the residence of the archbishop,  with the participation of many personalities, common people, and, especially that "before his arrival, Bible specialists and people who are interested in  Bible . This ceremony of presentation of the new biblical translation had minutes of difficulties: two people could not obtain authorization for participation from the police because they came from abroad. However, a joyous ambiance prevailed creating an event that was manifest in the life of a Church that is capable of expressing the Words of God in a modern language.

 Sources from Vietnam said that Archbishop Nguyen Van Binh had to give the authorities words of guarantee that visit of Bishop's of Livourne would only be a peafowl reunion so that the prelate could obtain permission from the authorities to participate in the ceremony. The personalities "coming from abroad" who could not participate in the ceremony were, in fact, the two pastors of the Evangelical Christian Churches. Mgr. Ablondi himself was not able to visit the seminarians as he had projected.

  The Church in a Cage

Msgr. Claudio Celli, declared, in an interview with Radio Vatican on October 24, 1996, that he "always said- that the Catholic Church of Vietnam is in a cage. The objective of the Holy See is to make every effort to enlarge it. And, the path towards full freedom is still very  long."   The statement by the prelate from the Vatican was attested by  various instances of harassment by the State security Forces, such as the case of  H’mong Catholics (EDA 305).

      Ease of Tension

During the trip to Vietnam of the delegation of the Vatican, June 11-16, 2001, the authorities of Vietnam agreed with the Vatican about the proceedings for  Episcopal nominations, one the diocese of the North, Bui Chu, and two for two the Phan Thiet Diocese and Saigon Diocese in the South.  It was not until  more than one month later, July 14, 2001, that the Vatican could officially publish these nominations. The Reverend Joseph Hoang Van Tiem, a Saleascean priest, was chosen to be the principal bishop of the diocese Bui Chu. The Reverend Paul Nguyen Thanh Hoan, a secular priest and native of Hue, was nominated the coadjutor bishop of the diocese of Phan Thiet, and, the Reverend Vu Duy Thong became the coadjutor bishop of Saigon. The Episcopal ordinations were all officially celebrated.

      

It is noted that the new Bishop of Bui Chu, aged 63, is a native of Nam Dinh in North Vietnam. He came to reside in the South with his family at the time of the exodus to the South  in 1954. He was educated  at the Saleasean institution Granted a diploma from the Institute for Theology of Bethlem in Cisjordanie, he taught moral theology at the Grand Seminary of Da Lat. Since 1995, he had also been invited to give lecture at the grand seminary Saint Joseph of Hanoi. The ceremony during which the bishop was ordained, August 8, 2001, the Cardinal Archbishop of Hanoi Pham Dinh Tung, assisted by the bishops of Thai Binh and Phat Diem, celebrated the nomination ceremony that was described as  particularly solemn. Eighteen bishops, two of whom from Thailand and Taiwan, as well as 300 priests the majority of whom belong to the clergy of South Vietnam participated in it. More than 40,000 adepts assembled on this occasion. The bishop of Lang Son, who was in charge of Homily, offered meditation and prayer at the ceremony. At the end of the ceremony, the new bishop of Bui Chu, in his  address to his assistant celebrants, expressed joy, explicating  the meaning of  the Episcopal motto by and for himself : “All that you wail say, do them!”

    

The diocese of Bui Chu, considered as the cradle of Catholicism in North Vietnam, remained without a titular bishop after the death of the preceding bishop, Msgr. Vu Duy Nhat, on December 11, 1999. It sheltered 362,000 adepts distributed in 129 parishes. There were 51 priests, 432 nuns and 3602 Bible instructors.  The new bishop of Phan Thiet, Msgr. Nguyen Thanh Hoan is a native of Nghe An in Central Vietnam. Aged 69, he was ordained priest in 1965. His first pastoral experiences took place in the region of Dong Ha where he created and directed an orphanage, a charge he continued to assume his role when the hazards of war occurred, in 1972. He and his faithful had to move f Ham Tan where he was nominated bishop.

Ordained by Msgr. Huynh Van Nghi, the principal bishop of Phan Thiet, on August 11, 2001, in a cathedral which is too small to hold the ensemble of assistants, the new bishop Nguyen Thanh Hoan confided to the Vietnamese press that it was his directional ideas that helped animate his performance. His Episcopal motto was: “The Gospel for the Poor,”  which to him really represents the essential` goals of his program. Before his nomination, the prelate had been well known for his social activities. Since 1994, he had engaged in the social work in favor of the poor, allowing them to raise cattle or recycle paper. Attending to the youths, he helped them to elevate their education. He even helped them to pursue higher education. Msgr. Nguyen Thanh Hoan thought that one could separate propagation from the service to the poor and that the diocese of Phan Thiet is a place particularly adapted to this task. 

   

The new auxiliary bishop of Saigon, Msgr. Vu Duy Thong, aged 49, was the youngest of the three new bishops. He was born in North Vietnam, in the province of Thai Binh. After his education at the secondary seminary of Long Xuyen, he entered the grand seminary of Saigon in 1975, at the time of change of regime. Because of economic difficulties and in the absence of courses at the grand seminary during long periods, the young seminarian practiced diverse occupations to make his living. He worked as a peasant for a year at the agricultural yard of Cu Chi, as a labor at a factory of tires of bicycles, or a worker at  clothes-making shop. In 1985, he was again called to sacerdotal vocation. He was responsible for a workshop at Hoc Mon. During seven years, he devoted his sacerdotal ministry in the parish of Bach Dang and fulfilled the functions of assistant professor at Saigon Grand Seminary. From 1992 to 1998, he studied in Paris and obtained a Master’s degree in theology. Upon his return, he resumed teaching at Saigon Grand Seminary.   

The Nomination

As regards the hierarchical rank of “hoa thuong’ with respect to Buddhism or cardinal and bishop with respect to Catholicism and corresponding ranks in other religions, approval for promotion of the Council of Ministers is necessary (Article 18). Priests or religious devotees, ordained or nominated by overseas religious organizations all have to be granted approval  by the Council of Ministers.  The Roman Catholic Church, in particular, ever met difficulties in the domain of  nomination.  Nomination of high dignitaries to the prelacy by the Vatican was thus complicated by decisions  and law orders, creating  a serious  problem to  ten Roman Catholic Church of Vietnam.

 The Reverend Chan Tin voiced dissent in an interview with the Radio VNCR, January 28, 1998, contending that the Communist State infringed on the rights as citizen of the Vietnamese Catholics and committed serious religious violations against the Roman Catholic Church of Vietnam. The State imposed restrictions with rules and restrictions regulating on the religious life and intervened in the Church’s internal affairs. It negated the Vatican’s nomination of Bishop Nguyen Van Thuan to be Coadjutor Archbishop of Saigon Diocese. Worse still, it eliminated the bishop from the Saigon prelacy. The dignitary was charged with false crimes for treason -a - blood debtor to the people. He was arrested and  imprisoned without a trial for 13 years. in prison. Such an hostile act to a high dignitary of the Church not only constituted  offense against the constitutional law but also a violation on the right to religious worship  and an infringement of religious freedom .

     

The Difficulties

After April 1975, the Episcopal leadership was in crisis.  Highest dignitaries in the South were either arrested and imprisoned or placed under residence.  In the North, the body of bishops thinned out after decades of  persecution. In 1980, the year of the establishment of the Episcopal Conference, there were thirty-one bishops for forty-two dioceses. Many bishops were  very old. Only two coadjutor bishops were nominated, four dioceses had no titular bishops, and many Episcopal sieges were vacant. The siege at Phu Cuong, Bui Chu Diocese, had been vacant since February 1995. No bishop had been nominated for Hung Hoa Diocese to replace Bishop Nguyen Phung Hieu who had passed away.

In the South, the diocese of Saigon had been without a titular bishop for a long time. The apostolic administrator Bishop Huynh Van Nghi of the Phan Thiet diocese could not fulfill his functions in an official manner. The civil authorities had not recognized his nomination by the Vatican.  It was not until March 9, 1988, five years of delaying of the approval of the State that Bishop Jean-Baptiste Pham Minh Man could be nominated archbishop of Saigon. The nomination had strained the efforts to normalize the Church ' s religious life, causing discord between the Vatican  and the Communist administration. Tension, in fact, began after the fall of South Vietnam with the negation of the Vatican nomination of Bishop Nguyen Van Thuan to the post of coadjutor archbishop of Saigo Diocesen. It was flatly denied by the civil authorities who not only sent the nominee out of the city but also inflicted on him 13 years in prison and house arrest. For the diocese of Hue where the Episcopal siege was also vacant, the situation was not much less complicated since the apostolic administrator, Bishop Nguyen Nhu The, who was recognized as titular prelate by the civil authorities, could only perform his duties under watch, however.

Elsewhere in the country, the situation remained entangled in difficulties. At the Episcopal ordination of the coadjutor bishop in Nha Trang, Cardinal Pham Dinh Tung, the Archbishop of Hanoi, maintained that amid the renovation of the country the urgent need for rejuvenation of the Roman Catholic Church of Vietnam as well as the upgrading the standard of competence of the episcopate, the clergy, and laity are still a must. The Vietnamese society is undergoing a radical transformation, and the Church can only respond to it by renovating and rejuvenating itself. “It is now the time the Church of Vietnam should be suitably equipped with a new contingent of bishops capable of assuming their role to meet the challenges  in the coming millennium.” He also hoped  for “the advent of a competent, generous, clear-sighted, and united clergy to work in collaboration with a laity that is well-formed and firm in faith”  The appeal of the cardinal was possibly addressed in part to the  authorities. The Episcopal nomination in Vietnam, in any case, must necessarily be approved on good will  by the civil authorities. The call fell to the deaf ears however. The delays of nomination for the two new coadjutor bishops, the prospective  bishop Nguyen Thich for Ban Me Thuot Diocese, andthe prospective bishop Nguyen Van Nho for Nha Trang Diocese, were the cases in evidence. 

Sources reported that since the nomination of Msgr. Pham Dinh Tung to be the head of the Hanoi prelacy, the relations between the civil authorities and the ecclesiastic members in the Saigon diocese became much more uneasy than it had been. Likewise, the nomination of Msgr. Huynh Van Nghi to the apostolic administrator of the Saigon prelacy presented a typically thorny problem,  causing severe damage to the relations between the State and  Church. In September 1993, the State showed its open opposition to the Vatican's nomination of an apostolic administrator for the Saigon prelacy. It openly downgraded the prestige of the clergy of Saigon that unanimously supported the Vatican's nomination and, mostly, that of the bishop concerned, Msgr. Huynh Van Nghi, who was performing with caution  his functions of Coadjutor Administrator instituted by the Vatican. Additionally, it seemed to ignore the demands of the Episcopal Conference of Vietnam. In fact, in a petition sent to the prime minister, the Episcopal Conference had reminded the “the government of "the rights to freedoms which the Church deserves to exercise and which are ignored by the government."  The Ho Chi Minh City People's Council had even shown its disapproval to the proposal of the Vatican. The negotiations between the city authorities and the Saigon prelacy became increasingly worsened. The apostolic administrator was obstructed from performing his functions. The apostolic authorities at the Vatican might have plighted to restore Msgr. Nguyen Van Binh, whose health had been ameliorated, to his old position. A proposal announced in April 1994 presaged the nomination of  Msgr. Huynh Van Nghi to be Bishop Coadjutor of Apostolic Administrator of the Saigon diocese. His nomination, which took place on August 11, 1993, seemed to have caused dissatisfaction among the civil authorities of the city. The reaction was revealed in the City authorities’ hostile attitude. which was sonorously reflected in the letter of communion of September 15, 1993, in which the People's Council of Ho Chi Minh City categorically disapproved the nomination of the Vatican.  (Eglise d'Asie, October 1, 19994).   

    

Bishop Huynh Van Nghi, the apostolic administrator of the Saigon diocese, who had been nominated to the post by the Vatican since August 1993, was obstinately denied approval by the authorities. As a result, on September 6, 1997,  he could not preside over the sacerdotal ordination of 7 priests that took place in the church of ND on Ky Dong Street, Saigon. The police warned him that his participation in the celebration or even his presence at the event would cause its immediate intervention. On October 7, 1993, he planned to organize an ordination for a group of 11 priests in Saigon. The civil authorities, again, denied the authorization to perform the services, arguing that the bishop, who had been not recognized by the State as coadjutor administrator of the Saigon diocese, would not be allowed to preside over the ceremony.  

In addition, the government still held the decision to appoint Bishop Huynh Van Nghi to the Saigon prelacy to replace the ailing Archbishop Nguyen Van Binh. A Catholic priest who asked anonyrmity said that the Party voluntarily troubled itself with  the ”religion of the Lord in Heaven.” The nomination of Msgr. Huynh Van Nghi to be Bishop Coadjutor at Saigon Diocese of the Vatican was not the sole object of disapproval. Tension grew as the authorities had already put the blame on the conduct of affairs of Msgr. Huynh Van Nghi, who, in their eyes, did not qualify for the post. Premier Vo Van Kiet  in his remarks confirmed this during an interview with the monthly magazine Cong Giao va Dan Toc (Catholicism and the Nation) on February 27, 1994. This was the reason for which  the civil  authorities of the city disapproved of Msgr. Huynh Van Nghi's conduct of affairs at the archdiocese.

   

 Msgr. Huynh Van Nghi, in an interview with a correspondent of the journal “La Croix en Asie et du Sud Est,” explained that there was  a reason behind the conflict between him and the civil authorities. This resulted from  the difficulties in his conduct of religious affairs with the authorities of the city of Saigon. The prelate particularly complicated the matter, relying on the blame the administration had mounted on him . He was accused of  trying to exclude "the Committee for Solidarity of Catholics" from the Saigon prelacy. The accusation was unfounded since the bishop only committed himself to the Church’s services.  He had been nevertheless obstructed from performing his duties in the diocese of which he had been in charge and where he had been officially nominated to perform his services. His duty was to obey once he had been nominated to the posit.

In its issue of October 1994, the bulletin of information of the Vietnamese Communist Party published a report on the political situation in the country. Among other issues, it stressed the intricate situation that entangled the relationship between Hanoi and the Vatican, imputing the blame to the Holy See for complicating the matter in the nomination to the highest prelate of Saigon Diocese. “The Vatican has striven to install Bishop Huynh Van Nghi in replacement of Archbishop Nguyen Van Binh and continues to obstruct priests and bishops from participating in political activities.” The allegation was an allusion to the letter of Cardinal Sodano to the president of the Episcopal Conference of Vietnam to help bring under protection the Vietnamese priests against political attempts of the Committee Of Union of Patriotic Catholics or political organs of similar type.

The deplorable situation of human rights in Vietnam became the center of attention of rights organizations worldwide. Australia, in particular, showed particular concern. A parliamentary delegation made a visit tour to Vietnam after the visit of Vietnam Foreign Affairs Minister Nguyen Manh Cam to Australia in February 1995. The delegation led by the Honorable Gareth Evans came to Vietnam to inquest the situation, which action had been accepted in principle by Vietnam Prime Minister Vo Van Kiet during his visit to Australia in May 1993. The Honorable Gareth Evans in an interview on the radio on February 7, 1995, declared that whereas the economic reforms inspired confidence and were even attractive abroad, a long way remained to go in matters of respect for political and civil rights.

The issue of religious freedom remained the subject of hostility. Vu Quang, Director of the Bureau of Religious Affairs, did not hide his uneasiness on the first day of meeting of the Conference of Catholic Bishops during September 5-12, 1994 after its Standing Committee had presented programs of activities. The presentation of the Conference was part of the proposal that the bishops had addressed to the government in 1993. It was a three-point proposal, including such matters as confirming the nomination of Msgr. Nguyen Van Thuan, who was then in Rome, restoring the position of Msgr. Nguyen Van Binh to his functions as Principal Bishop of the Saigon diocese, and nominating the Bishop of Phan Thiet to be Bishop Coadjutor at the Saigon prelacy. An agreement seemed to be far from taking shape. However, the government and the Church agreed to arrive at a decision within the several months to come. Nevertheless, until  November 1996, both the Vatican and Hanoi had not reached an agreement. The Vietnamese State refused to accept the nomination of Msgr. Huynh Van Nghi to the prelacy of Saigon Diocese but was ready to accept the nomination of any other bishop (Muc Vu (Ministry), No. 152, November 1996).

    

In his meeting with Prime Minister Vo Van Kiet, Msgr. Nguyen Minh Nhat, President of the Conference of Catholic Bishops of Vietnam, expressed his "satisfaction to see the doors more largely opened" with regard to "unity and promotion of democracy."  In his meeting with Party Secretary-general Do Muoi, Msgr. Nguyen Minh Nhat also reminded the Party leader of his speech at the Congress of the Fatherland Front whereby "it is necessary not to intervene in the internal affairs of the religions." No action had practical  been taken since then.

Msgr. Nguyen Van Sang, Bishop of Thai Binh, evoked two major obstacles that faced the clergy of his diocese. One of them was the transfer of priests. In 1993, in a petition sent to the prime minister, the National Conference of Bishops requested the rights to appointment of bishops and to transfer of diocesan priests from one parish to another within a diocese. In his reply, the prime minister said he considered that "the appointment and transfer of  posts of priests in the diocese are determined by the exigencies of the work in the diocese." In a way, the appointment of a priest is conditional on certain specified criteria. The Bishop of Thai Binh remarked that “it is still uneasy to arrive at an accord between the government and the diocese on this issue. The prelate stressed that "disagreement took place at all levels, between the province authorities and the diocesan clergy and the local authorities and the diocesan clergy. This State’s conduct of affairs impedes the priest’s from performing his religious duty and disables the religious life of the diocese. obstructing the equitable services of 31 priests in 64 parishes of the diocese with total faithful of 120,000."

The problem of nomination became an issue at the arrival of a Vatican delegation in the capital (EDA 338. There were still no response to the proposals for the three auxiliary bishops at Bui Chu, Phan Thiet, and Saigon   On June 11, 2001, while conducting negotiations with the Vietnamese Communist government, the Secretary of the Episcopal Conference, Mugs. Nguyen Son Lam, in an interview accorded to “Radio France Internationale,” drew up a broad picture of the situation of the Roman Catholic Church  of Vietnam.  The prelate presented a certain number of problems that he thought to be appropriate at the moment.   In the first place, he evoked the problem of nomination of bishops. This was the principal object of discussion between the representatives of the Holy Siege and Hanoi, Msgr. Celestine Migliore, of the Secretariat of State at the Vatican and Msgr. Nguyen Van Phuong of the Congregation for the Bible Propagation, on one side, and the officials of the State Bureau of Religious Affairs, on the other. The Vatican delegation had made proposals but  had  received no answer from the Communist government. The delegates of the Vatican, on their part, had received no clear answers on many of these proposals.

 Msgr. Nguyen Son Lam himself had expected positive answers concerning the nominations of certain prospective bishops that had been approved by the authorities, especially, the nominations for the auxiliary bishop for  Saigon and the coadjutor bishop for the diocese of Phan Thiet in the Central Vietnam. As a matter of sine-qua-non principle, the decision should be agreed upon by the Vietnamese Communist government. The situation in these two dioceses presented separate difficulties.  The Vatican desired to see Msgr. Nguyen Van Hoa, the bishop of Nha Trang, occupy the post of coadjutor cardinal of Saigon Diocese because the cardinal in charge was then aged and weak. The Prime Minister, on the other side, opposed to this nomination, and, to clarify the situation the cardinal in charge had  to  testify,  expressing his opinions in writing. Again, no practical decisions were made, and the Episcopal Conference had to wait and see  (EDA 319).