Talk:Holy See–Taiwan relations

Catholicism Mid‑importance

Holy See–Taiwan relations is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Catholicism task list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : see Draft articles
Assess : see Category:Unassessed Catholicism articles; Category:Unknown-importance Catholicism articles
Cleanup : Blessed Virgin Mary (see the talk page)
Collaborate : Invitation template needed, see Category:WikiProject invitation templates
Copyedit : Cuthbert Tunstall
Expand : Angelus; Roman Catholicism in Kosovo; Bishop Adolph John Paschang; Cum sæpe accidere; Altar Society; American Board of Catholic Missions; Bernard Häring
NPOV : Americanism (heresy); Ensoulment
Photo : see Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Catholicism
Stubs : see Category:Stub-Class Catholicism articles; Category:Catholic Church stubs
Update : Peer review; John Aloysius Maguire
Verify : Archdiocese of Glasgow; Archbishop of Westminster; Bishop; Saint Mungo; Sanctification; Westminster Cathedral
Other : Watch recent changes for Catholicism articles

European Microstates: Vatican City Mid‑importance

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Microstates, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of European Microstates on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European MicrostatesWikipedia:WikiProject European MicrostatesTemplate:WikiProject European MicrostatesEuropean Microstates articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Vatican City portal This article is supported by WikiProject Vatican City.

Taiwan Mid‑importance

	Taiwan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taiwan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Taiwan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TaiwanWikipedia:WikiProject TaiwanTemplate:WikiProject TaiwanTaiwan articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

International relations Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Should this article be moved to Holy See–Taiwan relations?

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move at this time. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:03, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Republic of China–Holy See relations → Holy See–Taiwan relations – In Talk:Republic of China it looks like they propose all Republic of China after 1949 should be renamed to Taiwan per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:POVTITLE. ––虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ✍ 19:55, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't it make more sense to wait until the main page is moved.--70.24.215.154 (talk) 01:22, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While I am supportive of moving the ROC article to Taiwan, I agree with the IP. Wait until the there is consensus for what to title the main article and then these bilateral relations article could all be moved en masse. Jenks24 (talk) 07:38, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Wait. Rennell435 (talk) 03:26, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Belize–Republic of China relations which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 17:45, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quotations requested 22 November 2024

Both are on the same page and nicely flow into each other:

"The Communist authorities expelled the Apostolic Internuncio in 1951, and a few years later the Internuncio moved to Taipei. The Holy See's official position is that it stull has a relationship with China, following in effect a policy of de facto recognition; it does not recognize the Republic of China as such (that is, as opposed to the People's Republic of China [PRC]); much less does it recognize Taiwan as an autonomous legal entity. This position has suited the ROC authorities, whether under the old autocracy or the newer democracy, as it provides a reason for their keeping an embassy to the Vatican, Taiwan's sole remaining diplomatic outpost in Europe."

The italics and brackets are Moody's own. JArthur1984 (talk) 04:49, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is a source saying otherwise: ^[1]. Also, the official Bilateral and Multilateral Relations of the Holy See refers to the Republic of China as "China".^[2] --Matt Smith (talk) 07:17, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you copied and pasted #2 and didn’t actually look it up: that 2007 link is broken. It was probably consistent with the academic source you questioned have here (ie it referred to the apostolic nunciature in Taipei as “China” - see Moody’s parenthetical).

1 is just non technical, less accurate, newspaper speak. It’s close but not quite right. We’re an encyclopedia and must be more precise. As noted above and in our article, it is a matter of de facto, not explicit recognition JArthur1984 (talk) 12:35, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can open the 2007 link without any problem. If it isn't working for you, try the archived version.

The first source simply uses "Taiwan" instead of "the Republic of China", and I think that is not that bad. Therefore, I would say it's still a usable one. Matt Smith (talk) 13:54, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, but I found the current version of the Holy See official diplomatic relations page, and it is correct and consistent with what we have in the article and the academic text.

The Holy See's position is that it has maintained uninterrupted relations with "China" since 1942. First its nunciature (the papal embassy) was in Nanjing when the city was under under nationalist control. Then for a couple years in Nanjing under PRC control. Then in limbo but the nuncio (the ambassador) had been expelled by PRC and was in Hong Kong. Then in 1953, the nunciature and nuncio moved to Taipei. Then in 1971 the ROC lost the UN seat for China. Then, in rather a clever bit of diplomatic maneuver, the Holy See appointed the nuncio (idris cassidy by then) to also be the nuncio to Bangladesh and he left Taipei. Since then there has been no Holy See 'ambassador' in China (however defined), although there is an 'embassy' in Taipei. Then when Cassidy left office, the Holy See never replaced him: so there has been no ambassador to China (however defined) since 1979. Through all of this, the ROC retains its embassy to the Holy See.

It is all very adroit and complicated management of a difficult diplomatic situation. In short the Holy See never takes a position on the primacy of the ROC vis a vis PRC, it simply only conducts formal relations with ROC. This is why we say "de facto" and "not explicit" and avoid the newspaper-y oversimplification. JArthur1984 (talk) 14:32, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The 2007 link shows that the Holy See refers to the ROC as "China". I'm not sure whether you have seen the point.

And we are not talking about the ambassador thing; we are talking about which government the Holy See recognizes as the representative of China. Matt Smith (talk) 15:52, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why is a 2007 archive link more important to you than a 2024 Version of the same source? JArthur1984 (talk) 16:51, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because the 2007 link (which is live, by the way) has key details that the 2024 version lacks. Matt Smith (talk) 04:20, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And I'm advising you to not reverting again until we reach a consensus. We don't want any edit wars. Matt Smith (talk) 04:22, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Michael Malinconi (March 14, 2023). "Italy's Taiwan Policy at a Crossroads". CHOICE. Retrieved November 22, 2024. Despite being one of the few remaining states in the world that recognizes Taiwan as the sole representative of China, the Holy See recently seemed eager to cater to CCP's interests and could represent an additional mitigating factor on Meloni's rhetoric and actions.
^ Holy See Secretariat of State (May 31, 2007). "Bilateral and Multilateral Relations of the Holy See". The Holy See. Retrieved November 22, 2024.

[1] Michael Malinconi (March 14, 2023). "Italy's Taiwan Policy at a Crossroads". CHOICE. Retrieved November 22, 2024. Despite being one of the few remaining states in the world that recognizes Taiwan as the sole representative of China, the Holy See recently seemed eager to cater to CCP's interests and could represent an additional mitigating factor on Meloni's rhetoric and actions.

[2] Holy See Secretariat of State (May 31, 2007). "Bilateral and Multilateral Relations of the Holy See". The Holy See. Retrieved November 22, 2024.

[1]

[2]