Papal Paradox: The Case for Jimmy Lai
Nov 04, 2024
Ah, Pope Francis, that tireless advocate for the oppressed! He’s taken a noble stand for Aung San Suu Kyi, offering the hallowed halls of the Vatican as a refuge for the beleaguered leader of Myanmar. A bold and generous gesture indeed! However, one can’t help but scratch their head and ponder: where’s the love for our other democracy advocate, the charmingly resilient Jimmy Lai locked away in Hong Kong? It’s a bit like being at a buffet, but only being offered a plate of broccoli while your mate gets a heaping pile of dessert, isn’t it?
As our cheeky pontiff met with a young Jesuit in the bustling heart of Jakarta, he reminded listeners that political symbols must be defended. Suu Kyi represents hope and courageous resistance. But isn’t Jimmy Lai also a beacon of democracy in the face of oppression? Looks like we’ve got a bit of a papal double standard here, folks!
One can only imagine the Vatican’s angelic hosts peeking in, popcorn in hand, as they watch this political drama unfold. Speculations arise: What’s it going to take for the Pope to extend a papal olive branch to Jimmy Lai, a dedicated Catholic entrepreneur? Perhaps a postcard? Paroles for pastries?
Jimmy Lai isn’t just a name on a list—he’s a 76-year-old man whose health is reportedly in decline while he languishes in those infamous Hong Kong prisons. A legal plea breathlessly declared by his international lawyers has raised alarms about his treatment—no communion? Really? It sounds like a scene from some absurdist comedy where the punchline just keeps getting more ridiculous.
And here’s a thought: while the Pope sends out heartfelt prayers to the Rohingyas—who certainly deserve every ounce of divine intervention—shouldn’t he also illuminate the plight of Lai? You’d think maintaining some consistency in compassion wouldn’t be too much to ask from the guy in the fancy hat!
Pope Francis, with all due respect, rallying for Suu Kyi’s release is commendable, but it feels a whole lot like picking favorites. His historical visit to Myanmar? A triumph! But the moment he chats with the big-wigs in Beijing, suddenly it feels like he’s turned the volume down on other critical issues, like the plight of the Uyghurs or the cries from the rooftops in Hong Kong.
Let’s not forget, there’s a gentleman named Cardinal Charles Bo over in Myanmar who’s been talking up a storm about the indescribable crises facing his people. He’s got his ear to the ground, and it seems like he’s been the only one ringing the alarm bells about Lai’s unjust imprisonment while advocating fervently for his own homeland.
You’d think with all this religious goodwill, the Vatican would be a bit more proactive in protecting all forms of freedom—freedom from oppression, freedom from prison, freedom for all religions to flourish. Isn’t that what it’s all about? One would hope so, but right now that seems more like a whimsical dream than a papal declaration.
So, where do we land? As the world watches with bated breath for the Pope’s next move, let’s put a note in this metaphorical suggestion box: Free Aung San Suu Kyi, Free Jimmy Lai! It’s a simple message! Surely the Vatican can handle that without having to summon the heavenly hosts.
In conclusion, the Pope’s gestures towards Myanmar are laudable, but perhaps his reach could extend a bit further into the East, reinforcing the notion that all oppressed voices matter equally. Heaven knows we could all do with a bit less hypocrisy in the halls of power—whether celestial or earthly.
The Vatican’s generous asylum offer must equally extend to Jimmy Lai, the imprisoned Hong Kong activist.
Nov 04, 2024
Pope Francis shakes hands with Myanmar’s then-civilian leader Aung San Suu Kyi during an event in Nay Pyi Daw in this Nov. 28, 2017, photo. (Photo: AFP)
By Benedict Rogers
Pope Francis’ recent appeal for the release of Aung San Suu Kyi, Myanmar’s iconic democracy leader, coupled with his offer of the Vatican as a sanctuary for her, is an important and commendable initiative.
The pope emphasized the importance of symbols in political movements while speaking to a young Jesuit in Jakarta, recalling Suu Kyi’s powerful image of peaceful resistance against the military. He urged the youth to embody that same bravery and acknowledged the courage of the Church in Myanmar.
The pope’s message serves as a crucial reminder for the global community to remain engaged and supportive of Myanmar during its current crisis.
However, a pressing concern arises: why has the pope not similarly advocated for Jimmy Lai, another symbol of democracy and justice, who has been unjustly imprisoned in Hong Kong?
Lai, a 76-year-old devout Catholic and prominent businessman, faces serious health concerns amid his imprisonment, which were highlighted in a recent appeal to the United Nations from his international legal team. Disturbingly, he is reportedly being denied access to receive the sacrament of Holy Communion.
Given these alarming circumstances, isn’t it appropriate for the pope to not only call for Lai’s release but also offer him sanctuary within the Vatican’s walls?
The appeal for Suu Kyi’s freedom is not unprecedented for Pope Francis; however, his specific proposal for her refuge in the Vatican is a notable development.
Since her incarceration following the military coup that ousted her government in February 2021, much about her health and living conditions remains shrouded in secrecy. Last year, her son raised serious concerns about her well-being and even suggested that her life may be in jeopardy.
Additionally, the pope reiterated his commitment to advocating for the Rohingya people, who have endured horrific persecution, acknowledging the deep personal connection he feels toward them.
His unwavering support for the Rohingya community, who have faced genocide in recent years, has been a consistent theme throughout his papacy. Since 2017, he has made numerous appeals for their rights and humanitarian aid.
Difficult questions arise about the pope’s relative silence on the Uyghurs, another oppressed Muslim population facing severe state-sponsored repression in China.
The Vatican’s diplomatic agreement with Beijing seemingly contributes to the pope’s reticence in speaking out against violations of human rights across China, including the rapid suppression of freedoms in Hong Kong.
This pontiff’s decision to sidestep meetings with notable religious leaders like the Dalai Lama raises eyebrows amid global conversations regarding human rights.
Nonetheless, the pope’s advocacy efforts for Myanmar should be acknowledged, as he has maintained a relationship with Suu Kyi that dates back to her release from house arrest in 2013. Their meetings signaled a significant shift in diplomatic relations.
Furthermore, it has been reported that Pope Francis met with Suu Kyi’s son at the Vatican last year, showing a personal commitment to her plight and extending support through his influential position.
Cardinal Charles Bo of Myanmar remains a fierce advocate for his nation in the midst of crisis, emphasizing the ongoing struggles confronting the populace, including the recent catastrophic flooding that has displaced hundreds of thousands.
The cardinal underscored the need for international solidarity and support, identifying the urgency of addressing humanitarian needs as the country grapples with unending challenges.
He has also been a vocal proponent for Jimmy Lai, standing in solidarity against the injustices meted out by Hong Kong’s government in the wake of the authoritarian National Security Law enacted in 2020.
Given this context, it becomes even more critical for the Vatican to heed the appeals of senior church leaders like Cardinal Bo regarding both Myanmar and the broader threats posed by China.
Pope Francis responded to a desperate plea from a young Jesuit regarding the loss and despair in Myanmar, affirming the importance of hope and action in striving for peace and democratic ideals amidst turmoil.
While the pope’s interventions for Myanmar are commendable, one can only hope he adopts a similar fervor in advocating for the dignity and rights of those suffering in China, Tibet, Xinjiang, and Hong Kong.
The same compassionate offer of refuge made for Aung San Suu Kyi needs to also embrace Jimmy Lai, another valiant advocate for democracy facing imprisonment.
The pope’s clear message should resonate across borders: Free Aung San Suu Kyi. Free Jimmy Lai. —ucanews.com
**Interview with Benedict Rogers on the Papal Paradox of Advocacy: The Case for Jimmy Lai**
**Editor:** Welcome, Benedict! Thank you for joining us to discuss your recent commentary on Pope Francis’s support for Aung San Suu Kyi and the glaring absence of similar advocacy for Jimmy Lai. Can you explain why you feel the Pope’s actions seem inconsistent?
**Benedict Rogers:** Thank you for having me! It’s important to recognize that Pope Francis has been commendable in advocating for Aung San Suu Kyi. Her plight symbolizes resistance against oppression in Myanmar, and the Pope’s offer for her to find refuge in the Vatican is certainly a powerful gesture. However, Jimmy Lai, a staunch defender of democracy and human rights in Hong Kong, is languishing in prison under dire circumstances. The contrasting visibility of the Pope’s support raises questions about selectivity in advocacy for oppressed figures.
**Editor:** You mentioned that Lai is in declining health and is reportedly being denied communion. How serious is this situation?
**Benedict Rogers:** It’s quite alarming. Jimmy Lai is a 76-year-old devout Catholic, and his health issues connected to his imprisonment are deeply concerning. Denying someone the sacrament of Holy Communion, especially a fellow Catholic, adds another layer of cruelty to his situation. Lai’s legal team has sought international support, and it’s critical that the Pope acknowledges his plight with the same vigor he has applied to Suu Kyi’s case.
**Editor:** What message do you think the Pope’s selective advocacy sends to the global community regarding human rights?
**Benedict Rogers:** It sends a mixed message. On one hand, it demonstrates the Vatican’s commitment to fighting oppression, but on the other, it suggests that some cases may be deemed more worthy than others. If the Pope is serious about upholding human rights universally, he must extend his advocacy to all those who suffer under oppression, regardless of their nationality or the level of media attention they receive.
**Editor:** Some observers have raised eyebrows at the Vatican’s diplomatic stance towards Beijing. Do you think this is influencing the Pope’s advocacy?
**Benedict Rogers:** Absolutely. The diplomatic agreement with Beijing has indeed made the Vatican cautious in addressing human rights violations in China and Hong Kong. This cautious approach risks compromising the robust moral authority that the Pope could wield in advocating for fundamental freedoms and rights. All oppressed voices deserve equal attention—whether they be the Uyghurs, the Rohingya, or Jimmy Lai.
**Editor:** What do you suggest the Vatican do moving forward?
**Benedict Rogers:** The Vatican should actively engage in dialogue about Jimmy Lai’s situation, perhaps issuing a formal statement calling for his release while offering him sanctuary if conditions allow. It should also reaffirm its commitment to human rights across the board, making it clear that all forms of oppression are intolerable. A unified message of compassion and justice could significantly enhance the moral impact of the Pope’s message globally.
**Editor:** Thank you, Benedict, for sharing your insights on this important issue. It’s clear that the call for justice and advocacy must be inclusive of all oppressed individuals, wherever they may be.
**Benedict Rogers:** Thank you for having me. The world benefits when the powerful stand up for the powerless, and it’s never too late to broaden that reach.
