From: nguyend@netcom.com (Quang Dinh)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.vietnamese
Subject: Re: [POL] Ho`a Ho+.p Ho`a Gia?i & Gia'o Ho^.i Thie^n Chu'a
Date: 11 Sep 92 17:36:46 GMT
Reply-To: nguyend@netcom.com




> 
> What had happened to the last 2 times that Vatican sent delegates to Vietnam?
> Does anybody know anything? Has Vatican issued any official comment or
> statement regarding its 2 trips to Hanoi and the subsequence trip made by Hanoi
> to Vatican? Do we have any official statement from the Vatican or it's just
> word-of-mouth, hearsays, rumors, etc. so far? We need some official statements
> from the Vatican. I hope that someone can provide us or point to us where to
> get them. Again, we need "official statement(s)" from the Vatican regarding the
> issue.
> 
   Ca'i na`y thi` ngoa`i kha? na<ng hie^.ntho+`i cu?a tui. Nhu+ng tui
   se~ try dde^? ti`m kie^'m ( So far, tui chi? co' ba?n tin tu+` to+`
    Ba'ch Vie^.t va` tu+` nhu+~ng nguo^`n tin tha^n hu+~u )           

> 
> LM Viet Chau, one of the highest ranking Vietnamese Catholic officers overseas
> (currently Chu Tich Cong DDong CG HK va Chu Tich HD Tu si VN tai HK ?), was
> that careless/ignorance or even naive (nga^y tho+)? Something might go wrong
> here. I suspected this is a case of "jumping the gun". It could be a false
> start. As one of the top leaders he should have read many classified stuffs.
> Knowing a lot is basically a good thing but sometimes it might backfire.
> 
   O^ng LM Vie^.t Cha^u trong tru+o+`ng ho+.p na`y dda'ng bi. le^n a'n
 va` ca?nh ca'o ma.nh me~ dde^? la`m gu+o+ng cho ke? kha'c. Nhu+~ng
 ti'nh toa'n co' ti'nh ca'ch ca' nha^n, mu+O+.n hi`nh thu+"c to^n gia'o
 na`y no. dde^? la`m lo+.i cho quye^`n lo+.i ca' nha^n cU?a mi`nh thi`
 dde^`u pha?i bi. le^n a'n va` co' bie^.n pha'p ca?nh ca'o thie^.t ma.nh
 ( ne^n nho+' qua vu. na`y, o^ng Vie^.t cha^u va` Ngo^ Thanh Nha`n dde^`u
 chia nhau tie^`n lo+`i bo? tu'i)

  " Knowing a lot.. "  :  Ca'i na`y go.i la` TRI' THU+'C  Do+?m !
 
   Tu+o+?ng mi`nh bie^'t nhie^`u nhu+ng thu+.c ra bie^'t cha<?ng bao
    nhie^u va` ddo^i khi co' nhu+~ng ha`nh ddo^.ng a^'u tri~ dde^'n
    ddo^. nhie^`u ke? bi`nh thu+o+`ng nhi`n tha^'y nhu+ va^.y , ho.
     cu~ng pha?i bi.t mie^.m ma` cu+o+`i.

    Kho^? 1 ca'i la` ma^'y anh Tri' Thu+'c Do+?m la.i hay lo.t va`o
    ba^~y cu?a co^.ng sa?n gia<ng ra mo+'i che^'t chu+'.


> >  NHU+NG , qua su+. pha?n ddo^'i ma.nh me~ cu?a ca'c ngu+o+`i Co^ng gia'o
> > o+? ha?i ngoa.i ( dda<.c bie^.t o+? Orange County, Nam Cali, o+? San Jose
> > Ba<'c Cali) cu~ng nhu+ qua su+. gia?i thi'ch, trao ddo^?i quan ddie^?m,
> > la^.p tru+o+`ng cu~ng nhu+ kinh nghie^.m so^'ng vo+'i Vie^.t co^.ng
> > cu?a mo^.t so^' ngu+o+`i hoa.t ddo^.ng trong co^.ng ddo^`ng vo+'i LM
> > Vie^.t Cha^u, thi` LM Vie^.t Cha^u dda~ tuye^n bo^' du+'t khoa't ba~i
> > bo~ chu+O+ng tri`nh du li.ch ve^` VN co' lo+.i cho Vie^.t co^.ng na`y
> > ( LM Cha^u dda~ tuye^n bo^' nhu+ tre^n khi no'i chuye^.n qua phone vo+'i
> > 1 u?y ban Co^ng gia'o vu`ng San Jose ddo^`ng tho+`i cu~ng Fax 1 ba?n
> > no'i vie^.c LM Cha^u ba~i bo? chuye).
> 
> Quang DDinh, can you tell me where I can get a copy of LM Cha^u's statement
> over the cancelation of his plan of visiting Vietnam? Since I haven't read it I
> can't comment on it, but some VN weekly newspapers I read in San Jose expressed
> discontents after reading his statements (he denied of any wrong doing (?), he
> said he only continued what's been set up by his predecessor(?))
> 
   Give me your address! I will provide you one.
   " He said he only... " : 
  Ddu+o+ng nhie^n khi o^ng ta la`m sai va` bi.
  le^n a'n ga<'t gao thi` o^ng ta pha?i ti`m ca'ch ddo+~ dda.n va` ddo^?
  sang cho ngu+o+`i kha'c la~nh phu. vo+"i o^ng. O^ng ta co`n no'i la`
  dda~ ddu+o+.c su+. ddo^`ng y' cu?a ca?  Gia'm mu.c (higher rank)
  va` 1 so^' tu si~ nhu+ng khi ho?i to+'i ca'c ngu+O+`i na`y thi` ho.
  kho^ng bie^'t gi` ve^` his plan. Tru+o+'c tha'i ddo^. ngoan co^' cu?a
  o^ng LM Vie^.t Cha^u na`y, hie^.n ddang co' nhu+~ng va^.n ddo^.ng dde^?
  loa.i bo? o^ng ta ra kho?i chu+"c vu. Chu? ti.ch Ho^.I Ddo^`ng Tu Si~
  VN ta.i Hoa Ky`. O^ng ta dda'ng bi. loa.i bo?.

> 
> My question to Quang DDinh and other interest people is:
> 
> 	Between "To^? Quo^'c va` Gia'o Ho^.i" if you have only one choice,
> which is to put one aside for the benefit of the other, then which one will you
> put aside? Your country or your Vatican (Gia'o Ho^.i)?
> 

   Ha` Ha` Ha`! Ba.n /cuong ddu+a ra ca^u ho?i  .

   Ca^u ho?i tu+o+?ng la` kho' nhu+ng thie^.t ra ra^'t ddo+n gia?n ne^'u
   chu'ng ta nghi~ sa^u 1 chu't.

    Vo+"i tui thi`  :  TUI SE~ CHO.N QUYE^`N LO+.I DA^N TO^.C TRU+O+'C
                      
    Tui kho^ng nha<'m ma<'t no'i bu+`a cho xong chuye^.n ma` tui ddu+a
    ra ly' le~ ha<?n ho`i :

   To^n gia'o thi` co' ma<.t ta.i nhie^`u no+i tre^n the^' gio+"i ( to^`n
  ta.i o+? nhie^`u quo^'c gia). Cho ne^n to^n gia'o kho^ng co' o+? dda^y
  thi` se~ co' o+? no+i kha'c. No' ddu+O+.c duy tri` bo+?i nhie^`u quo^'c gia
  Nghi~a la` to^n gia'o se~ kho^ng bi. tie^u
  die^.t 1 ca'ch de^~ da`ng ( Ha~y nhi`n ba<`ng chu+"ng la` ca'c quo^'c
  gia co^.ng sa?n tre^n the^' gio+"i ti`m mo.i ca'ch tie^u die^.t ca'c
  to^n gia'o nhu+ng dde^`u tha^'t ba.i). 

    Co`n que^ hu+o+ng tui ( Vie^.t nam) chi? pha't trie^?n trong 1 gia?i
  dda^'t ha.n he.p vo+"i nhu+~ng phu+o+ng tie^.n cu?a chi'nh no' ma`
  kho^ng co' su+. giu'p ddo+~ ma.nh tu+` ca'c quo^'c gia kha'c. Nghi~a
  la` no' de^~ bi. tie^u die^.t ho+n so vo+'i to^n gia'o.

   To^n gia'o ma^'t quye^`n lo+.i o+? dda^'t nu+o+'c tui, to^n gi'ao
  ddo' kho^ng che^'t Nhu+ng quye^`n lo+.i cu?a da^n to^.c tui ma^'t, Co'
  the^? da^n to^.c tui se~ bi. tie^u die^.t

 Chi'nh vi` va^.y : Tui se~ cho.n quye^`n lo+.i cu?a da^n to^.c tui tru+o+'c

> 
> 
> /cuong
> 

  Good Te^'t Trung Thu!

  nguyend.