New Jesuit Review 2010 Vol. 1, # 4 Beda Chang: Shanghai’s Jesuit Martyr Download as pdf By Fr. Paul Mariani, S.J. Paul Mariani, S.J., is a professor of history at Santa Clara University. It seems to be a truism that among the millions who perished in Mao’s China, there were not a few Catholic saints among them. Yet, because of political sensitivities, the church has so far withheld from officially canonizing any of them. In fact, the last canonized native-born Chinese saint dates from the 1900 Boxer Rebellion. When political sensitivities relax and the church is free to honor its post-1949 Chinese saints, at the top of the list -- most likely -- will be Beda Chang (Zhang Zhengming, 1905-1951), a Chinese Jesuit. Today few remember who he was; this was not always the case. In 1952 none other than Fulton Sheen called him “a martyr to the faith.” In this 400th anniversary year of the death of Matteo Ricci, we can rightly count Beda Chang as part of Ricci’s legacy. Yet Chang’s career speaks more of not so much of cautious confrontation of with the authorities than of cautious accommodation. Moreover, the face representing the Chinese Church is no longer a European missionary, but a native-born Chinese. In Shanghai today Chang is mentioned in hushed tones. In 2006, I visited the old St. Ignatius High School, still active as Xuhui High School. A tour guide shows us to the second floor where pictures of all the school principals hang dating back to the 1840s. Chang was one of a few Chinese directors; a point of pride. Yet when our guide is pressed about what became of Chang, his voice drops, only to tell us simply that he died. The reality -- as usual -- is far more complex. Who was this Beda Chang? Much of my own information comes from Jean-Claude Coulet’s, Father Beda Chang: Witness for Unity, as well as from archival material, some of it previously unpublished. Beda Chang entered the Jesuits in 1925. After his priestly ordination in 1940, he obtained his doctoral degree from the Sorbonne, one of the first generation of Chinese priests to do so. Upon his return to Shanghai, he turned St. Ignatius into one of the best high schools in the city. Chang was held in high regard, for, in time, he was also made a dean at Aurora University, director of the Jesuit-run Bureau of Sinology, and a consultor to the Jesuit mission superior. In fact, in a field dominated by French missionaries, Chang was the only Chinese Jesuit to hold so many positions of authority. According to Jack Clifford, an American Jesuit and Chang’s contemporary, Chang -- in Shanghai at least -- was “by far the most influential teacher, lecturer and writer in Catholic cultural circles.” Chang’s official roles were substantial in themselves. But times demanded that -- in defense of the faith -- he take on unofficial roles as well: architect of Catholic policy, animator of the Catholic Youth, symbol of the church’s “firm stand,” and martyr. * * * Once the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) “liberated” Shanghai at the end of May 1949, it moved slowly but deliberately to consolidate its position. For the first year and a half -- although it would liquidate landlords and remnants of the Nationalist army -- the regime was still benign enough to its “enemies without guns.” However, it still demanded its pound of flesh. The demands on the Church increased in three key areas: taxes, school curricula, and religious policy. How should the Church respond to the ever increasing pressure? Church leaders were divided. At one extreme were the hardliners. This group, which included the Jesuit mission superior, refused any conciliatory gestures to the new regime. Rome’s firm stand against communism was to be implemented to the letter of the law. Thus, any Catholics who joined the CCP were automatically excommunicated; children were not permitted to join the Communist Youth League; and Catholics were strongly discouraged from reading the Communist newspapers and marching in Communist-led parades. Some voices of moderation challenged this position. The situation had changed, they argued: the CCP was no longer simply a political party; it was the government. How could Catholics avoid some compromise with the government? Should they even abstain from government rations? At the other extreme were the compromisers. They conceded most points to the government, and looked for maximum flexibility when interpreting Church law. They could have been motivated by fear, sympathy for the new regime, or a keen sense of which way the political winds were blowing. The majority of Shanghai Catholics were caught in the middle. They knew that -- for the time being at least -- they had to compromise with the new regime in order to survive. Besides, the CCP had proven far more powerful than earlier imagined. It was in this context that Chang formulated a cautious position vis-à-vis the CCP. It began to take shape in early 1950. Chang first studied the new regime’s religious policy. He compared the current predicament of the Catholic Church in China to the unfolding events in Eastern Europe. The Chinese situation differed, for it had a small Catholic minority who were still led mainly by foreign bishops. Chang knew that the Church was still -- despite nearly 350 years in the Shanghai region -- vulnerable to the charge of being a foreign religion. She must -- at all costs -- avoid being labeled anti-patriotic or imperialist. Chang’s “middle position” mediated between collaboration and confrontation. In short, Catholics were told to yield in secondary matters, but remain firm in the essentials of the faith. Chang had no illusions about its powerful adversary. The CCP was dedicated to atheistic materialism, which called for the ultimate destruction, or at least the disappearance, of all religion. Chang’s hope was that, before the final blow came, citizens would see that the Church had made every effort at conciliation. The blame for the confrontation would then have to be placed on the regime and its increasingly aggressive stance. Chang’s strategy would soon be put to the test. * * * Chang needed to do more than simply formulate a cautious policy; he needed to implement it as well. In other words, as the Church was stripped of her schools and her financial base, she had to shore up her human capital. If Catholics were to remain firm in their faith, he would have to strengthen Catholics, not just Catholic institutions. Chang’s genius was to first re-animate the Marian Sodalities at St. Ignatius High School. They would serve as schools without bricks and mortar. The Marian Sodalities had a long history in the Shanghai region. By 1949, however, at least among Shanghai’s youth, they had fallen into desuetude. Chang brought them back to life, for he saw the spirit of the Sodalities as the spirit of the Jesuits. In fact, the 1550 foundational formula for the Jesuits stated that the order had been “founded chiefly … for the defense and propagation of the faith” (Cons. 3). The hope was that, in the current atmosphere -- where attacks on the faith were multiplying -- the youth would also learn how to “defend and propagate” the faith. Chang did not stop there. For, even as the Sodalities were coming back to life, Chang also rallied around himself a leadership team of eight Shanghai Jesuits, the pride of Catholic Shanghai. They were native-born and highly educated; six of them had received advanced degrees from abroad. This team found creative ways to mobilize the Catholic Youth of the city. To this end, by the summer of 1950, the team organized a retreat movement. In these retreats, students learned how to strengthen their faith in difficult times. The students were expected to attend two three-day retreats each year. In time, two thousand students (split equally between elementary school students and their seniors) would be active members of this retreat movement. In direct response to the Communist vanguard, they saw themselves as a Catholic vanguard. In fact, Catholics boasted of the similarities between CCP indoctrination and their own religious formation. An internal church document would later claim: “At the time when the Communist militants were attending very tough formative retreats, the Catholics were happy, for their part, to find new strength in a serious retreat.” This last observation was not accidental, as there is solid evidence that Chang had a further motivation to mobilize the Catholic Youth. For Chang was not only an astute student of Communist policy, he also studied Communist tactics as well. For years, he had observed the success of underground Communist cells with their hierarchical and compartmentalized structures. They were nearly unbreakable. Chang also became convinced that Communists had penetrated every level of the Nationalist government. This had accounted for the Nationalists’ ultimate demise. The Church need not -- Chang would have argued -- infiltrate the Communist Party. However, she should employ the tried and true tactics of the cell groups. They would form a pyramidal structure with Bishop Ignatius Kung Pinmei and the Shanghai Jesuit leadership team at the top. Next would come division leaders comprised of university students who, in turn, would direct the high school and middle school team leaders. In addition, there were “special militants.” This elite vanguard would function where priests could no longer go. They were to remain secret even to themselves, often known only to their Jesuit spiritual directors. Chang, it was clear, was mimicking the Communist cell groups. These Catholic cells would weather extreme persecution and carry on long after the priests and other leaders had been arrested. The end result: as the Church was stripped of important assets, she compensated in other areas. She now had a vigorous and growing youth organization under the direction of Beda Chang and the Shanghai Jesuit leadership team. * * * Despite the increasing pressure on the Church on the part of the government, even as late as June 1950 there was still an uneasy coexistence between the two. It was not to last. For in the same month hostilities broke out on the Korean peninsula. CCP religious policies hardened. There is still debate as to whether the regime would have carried out its radical policies in any case -- that is, whether the Korean War simply provided a pretext to hasten the social transformation promised from the beginning. In the event, CCP policies lurched to the left, and they directly affected Beda Chang. Thus far his “middle position” had worked; now the pressure mounted. The government pressed him, as a high school principal, to recruit “volunteers” to fight in Korea. Rallies were held on school grounds. In response, Chang and other Jesuits decided to leave the recruitment of the Korean “volunteers” to the school’s political instructors. Some party members construed this as obstruction of party directives. Government officials plotted their moves. At a December send-off ceremony for the Korean “volunteers,” a young CCP cadre planned to attack Chang for blocking the volunteer movement. Chang spoke first. He congratulated all the youth who had volunteered to go to Korea. Remarkably, they had done this by their own free will, for he had done nothing to persuade them to volunteer. Chang had maneuvered deftly. But such deft maneuvering could not succeed indefinitely. There was soon more serious conflict. In February 1951, the party called together the directors of private secondary schools. Among the five Catholic representatives was Beda Chang. By the end of the meeting, a motion was proposed that Catholics should promote the Three-Self Patriotic Movement (TSPM). The TSPM had begun in the Protestant churches, and called on them to sever ties with foreign mission boards. In reality, they were to prove their patriotism by submitting directly to the state. Some Protestant churches acquiesced, others resisted. The Catholics rejected the TSPM outright, for it called on them to sever ties with the pope and the universal Church. As such, it contradicted Church doctrine. In good conscience, Catholics could not support the motion. An argument ensued at the meeting. Chang defended the Church’s record. He spoke of the deep patriotism of Catholics. He spoke of the Catholic Brigade in the recent war against Japan, and of the charitable works of the Church. J.C. Coulet quotes Chang as saying “Our love for our country springs from what is deepest in our Catholicism: our love of God.” Catholics ultimately rejected the motion to support the movement. It would put them into schism with the universal Church, they argued, and destroy the “indefectible” unity owed their Church. The firm Catholic stand enraged the regime. It also led to the first arrests in the Shanghai Catholic community. Chang himself had clearly crossed the lines. A few months later, a list of his ten crimes was posted on school property. CCP cadres agitated for his removal as principal. Under pressure, Chang had no choice but to step down. Soon St. Ignatius High School was confiscated outright. Even so, Chang still posed a threat. In fact, Hu Wenyao, an administrator at the Jesuit-run Aurora University and a recent convert to Catholicism, warned the party about Chang. Hu was now a leader in the Catholic equivalent of the TSPM. Jean Lefeuvre, in his Shanghaï: les enfants dans la ville, quotes Hu as saying: “If you cannot dispose of Beda Chang, all your efforts will come to nothing, for he will foil all your maneuvers.” The situation became increasing dire. Already in February, the government had promulgated the “Regulations for the Suppression of Counterrevolutionaries.” The order was implemented in Shanghai -- with lightning speed -- on the night of 27-28 April 1951. Bright red trucks (called dahongbao -- “big red envelopes” by the local populace) cruised Shanghai’s streets day and night. By the time it was over, up to 20,000 people in Shanghai had been arrested and at least 1,000 of them were executed. Catholics were largely unscathed, but three youth leaders were arrested at Aurora University, as was a French Jesuit who was an expert on Chinese law. In response, Chang decided to adapt the organization of the Catholic Youth. They were now to become even more invisible and agile so as to evade CCP scrutiny. But the regime was unrelenting in its campaigns. Nationwide it soon targeted the papal internuncio to China Anthony Riberi, the Catholic Central Bureau (which served as the bishop’s coordinating arm), and the Legion of Mary. * * * The regime continued to promote vigorously the TSPM among Catholics. In order to succeed, it desperately needed to co-opt a recognized Catholic leader, preferably a priest, and have him head its Catholic branch. The CCP knew that the recent convert Hu Wenyao had little credibility in leading the “independent” Catholics. It was in these circumstances that the three Catholic school leaders who had opposed the Catholic TSPM in February were arrested. Chang himself was taken on 9 August 1951, while he was quietly playing mahjong after lunch with fellow Jesuits in the faculty recreation room of the Jesuit School of Theology. Fr. Charles McCarthy, S.J., the rector of the school of theology, would later write: “can’t say we’ll see him again.” This much proved to be true. The government did not announce Chang’s arrest in the newspapers. Catholics speculated that the reason might have been that, in police custody, Chang would break and become the cooperative clerical leader the government needed. Little is known of what happened to Chang during his four months in the Ward Road Jail, a vast British-built prison in the north of the city. Coulet reconstructs his final weeks. …every effort was made to break his will and to use him in spite of himself. Nights on nights of interrogation followed his refusal, when lack of sleep and continual tension combined to wear down the last resources of his bodily strength. Fellow prisoners heard him, exhausted and at the end of his strength, repeating simply over and over again “Jesus, Mary and Joseph, help me.” Then Coulet speculates on the exact cause of his death: The constant lack of sleep poisoned his nervous system, and Father Beda fell into a coma. Fearing that he would die before they had had their way with him, the authorities ordered his immediate removal to the prison hospital. But it was already too late … At 8 a.m. on 11 November Beda Chang lay dead. The official cause of death was encephalitis. About 5:30 p.m. that same day, a policeman went to the Jesuit residence in Xujiahui to convey the news. Several Jesuits went with Chang’s brother to the prison. There they found Chang’s body stretched out in the prison courtyard. There were no overt signs of torture, but there were unmistakable signs of starvation and exposure. Even Chang’s brother, a medical doctor, did not recognize the blackened and emaciated body. The Catholic community was outraged. By early morning of the twelfth, numerous young people and local Catholics gathered at St. Ignatius High School chapel. Word of the event spread through the Catholic Youth chain of command. The crowds gathering at the high school chapel grew larger and larger. “Where is the body?” the students yelled. At first, the police had promised to turn over the body, but now they feared a civil disturbance. They sent out undercover agents to sense the mood of the crowd. Aware of the volatile situation, the police reneged on their promise to turn over the body. They then dispersed the crowd. According to Coulet, the following day three thousand people thronged St. Ignatius Church. Boys wore black armbands and girls put the “traditional white knot of mourning” in their hair. The Jesuit mission superior celebrated the Mass and Bishop Ignatius Kung gave the absolution. It was not until late that night, and in great secrecy, that several priests and some immediate family were finally allowed to bring Chang’s body to the cemetery. The following day the youth had their own funeral Mass at the Shanghai church of Christ the King. The priests celebrated the Mass of the Holy Cross with red vestments -- the liturgical color for martyrs -- in place of the customary black. The following day another Mass was held at St. Peter’s Church with many Aurora University students attending. For their part, the students continued to wear black armbands to demonstrate both their respect and their defiance. McCarthy would write his Provincial on 24 November 1951: We have had much touching evidence of the admiration and affection which the people had for the dear good Chinese Father who died ‘in vinculis’ [in prison] on the 11th. The Masses of requiem were thronged beyond precedent, with crowds devout, earnest -- of men and young people especially. Newspapers carried some articles to smear his name, but they are taken at their worth. The incident will fill a page of exceptional beauty in the history of the Chinese Church and of the Society. Probably there will be more like it, before long. These requiem Masses, “thronged beyond precedent,” took place throughout the city. Finally, the CCP moved to end them. The police called in the pastor of Sacred Heart Church in Hongkou and questioned him about the “criminal” Chang. Then the order went out: no more public Masses for Beda Chang. Priests who had been responsible for the requiem Masses were accused in the Communist newspapers, and the bishop was “questioned” on his attitude toward the whole affair. The CCP published its viewpoint on Beda Chang in the 17 November 1951 issue of the Liberation Daily. The article was entitled “The Finale of the Imperialists’ Running Dog and Counterrevolutionary, Beda Chang.” It said: “Snugly hidden in Zikawei’s [Xujiahui’s] Middle School [formerly St. Ignatius High School] under the cloak of religion, the imperialist running dog and counter-revolutionary, Beda Chang, carried on anti-Russian, anti-Communist and anti-people’s criminal activities both before and after the liberation.” It then listed a litany of his sins. In 1940 he “brazenly entertained” the Japanese. He sent youth “to the States for its slavery education.” He invited bandits “to give reactionary talks” at St. Ignatius High School. He also linked-up with the “American bandit Chiang Kai-shek” and the “criminal Yu Pin.” He distributed anti-Communist propaganda. He engaged in politics at the school by putting the “the school committee in the hands of reactionary, obscurantist, half-baked students, urging them not to let the progressive elements take control.” As a result: “After several interrogations Chang could see the proof of his crimes without any hope of refuting the accusations. But the criminal Chang died of encephalitis before the court could deal out punishment to him.” The article ends on an exasperated note. “They [the Catholics] would have it that this criminal counter-revolutionary is a ‘Saint.’” Needless to say, the Catholic perspective, found in a China Missionary Bulletin editorial, was quite different: “His sermon is endless now, written in eternity for the ears of men and angels with the last free gift he had to give to God -- his life.” Catholics now believed that Beda Chang would intercede for them from heaven. For their part, the last thing that the regime wanted was a martyr for the faith. The police called in a representative of the bishop and asked if Chang would be canonized a saint. They were told that the bishop had no such authority. Later, the police told the representative that the bishop would be held responsible for any miracles performed by Beda Chang. It was more than ironic to see the fear the atheistic cadres had for possible miracles. Beda Chang was proving to have more spiritual authority in heaven! From the time of his burial onward, Catholics made pilgrimages to Chang’s unmarked gravesite. In response, the police stationed armed guards there. The irony was not lost on Catholics -- whose memories reach back to an earlier Victim with guards placed outside his tomb.

New Jesuit

Review

2010

Vol. 1, # 4

Beda Chang: Shanghai’s Jesuit Martyr

Download as pdf

By Fr. Paul Mariani, S.J.

Paul Mariani, S.J., is a professor of history at Santa Clara University.

It seems to be a truism that among the millions who perished in Mao’s China, there were not a few Catholic saints among them. Yet, because of political sensitivities, the church has so far withheld from officially canonizing any of them. In fact, the last canonized native-born Chinese saint dates from the 1900 Boxer Rebellion.

When political sensitivities relax and the church is free to honor its post-1949 Chinese saints, at the top of the list -- most likely -- will be Beda Chang (Zhang Zhengming, 1905-1951), a Chinese Jesuit.

Today few remember who he was; this was not always the case. In 1952 none other than Fulton Sheen called him “a martyr to the faith.” In this 400th anniversary year of the death of Matteo Ricci, we can rightly count Beda Chang as part of Ricci’s legacy. Yet Chang’s career speaks more of not so much of cautious confrontation of with the authorities than of cautious accommodation. Moreover, the face representing the Chinese Church is no longer a European missionary, but a native-born Chinese.

In Shanghai today Chang is mentioned in hushed tones. In 2006, I visited the old St. Ignatius High School, still active as Xuhui High School. A tour guide shows us to the second floor where pictures of all the school principals hang dating back to the 1840s. Chang was one of a few Chinese directors; a point of pride. Yet when our guide is pressed about what became of Chang, his voice drops, only to tell us simply that he died.

The reality -- as usual -- is far more complex. Who was this Beda Chang? Much of my own information comes from Jean-Claude Coulet’s, Father Beda Chang: Witness for Unity, as well as from archival material, some of it previously unpublished.

Beda Chang entered the Jesuits in 1925. After his priestly ordination in 1940, he obtained his doctoral degree from the Sorbonne, one of the first generation of Chinese priests to do so. Upon his return to Shanghai, he turned St. Ignatius into one of the best high schools in the city. Chang was held in high regard, for, in time, he was also made a dean at Aurora University, director of the Jesuit-run Bureau of Sinology, and a consultor to the Jesuit mission superior. In fact, in a field dominated by French missionaries, Chang was the only Chinese Jesuit to hold so many positions of authority. According to Jack Clifford, an American Jesuit and Chang’s contemporary, Chang -- in Shanghai at least -- was “by far the most influential teacher, lecturer and writer in Catholic cultural circles.”

Chang’s official roles were substantial in themselves. But times demanded that -- in defense of the faith -- he take on unofficial roles as well: architect of Catholic policy, animator of the Catholic Youth, symbol of the church’s “firm stand,” and martyr.

* * *

Once the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) “liberated” Shanghai at the end of May 1949, it moved slowly but deliberately to consolidate its position. For the first year and a half -- although it would liquidate landlords and remnants of the Nationalist army -- the regime was still benign enough to its “enemies without guns.” However, it still demanded its pound of flesh. The demands on the Church increased in three key areas: taxes, school curricula, and religious policy.

How should the Church respond to the ever increasing pressure? Church leaders were divided. At one extreme were the hardliners. This group, which included the Jesuit mission superior, refused any conciliatory gestures to the new regime. Rome’s firm stand against communism was to be implemented to the letter of the law. Thus, any Catholics who joined the CCP were automatically excommunicated; children were not permitted to join the Communist Youth League; and Catholics were strongly discouraged from reading the Communist newspapers and marching in Communist-led parades.

Some voices of moderation challenged this position. The situation had changed, they argued: the CCP was no longer simply a political party; it was the government. How could Catholics avoid some compromise with the government? Should they even abstain from government rations?

At the other extreme were the compromisers. They conceded most points to the government, and looked for maximum flexibility when interpreting Church law. They could have been motivated by fear, sympathy for the new regime, or a keen sense of which way the political winds were blowing.

The majority of Shanghai Catholics were caught in the middle. They knew that -- for the time being at least -- they had to compromise with the new regime in order to survive. Besides, the CCP had proven far more powerful than earlier imagined. It was in this context that Chang formulated a cautious position vis-à-vis the CCP. It began to take shape in early 1950.

Chang first studied the new regime’s religious policy. He compared the current predicament of the Catholic Church in China to the unfolding events in Eastern Europe. The Chinese situation differed, for it had a small Catholic minority who were still led mainly by foreign bishops. Chang knew that the Church was still -- despite nearly 350 years in the Shanghai region -- vulnerable to the charge of being a foreign religion. She must -- at all costs -- avoid being labeled anti-patriotic or imperialist.

Chang’s “middle position” mediated between collaboration and confrontation. In short, Catholics were told to yield in secondary matters, but remain firm in the essentials of the faith.

Chang had no illusions about its powerful adversary. The CCP was dedicated to atheistic materialism, which called for the ultimate destruction, or at least the disappearance, of all religion. Chang’s hope was that, before the final blow came, citizens would see that the Church had made every effort at conciliation. The blame for the confrontation would then have to be placed on the regime and its increasingly aggressive stance.

Chang’s strategy would soon be put to the test.

* * *

Chang needed to do more than simply formulate a cautious policy; he needed to implement it as well. In other words, as the Church was stripped of her schools and her financial base, she had to shore up her human capital. If Catholics were to remain firm in their faith, he would have to strengthen Catholics, not just Catholic institutions.

Chang’s genius was to first re-animate the Marian Sodalities at St. Ignatius High School. They would serve as schools without bricks and mortar. The Marian Sodalities had a long history in the Shanghai region. By 1949, however, at least among Shanghai’s youth, they had fallen into desuetude. Chang brought them back to life, for he saw the spirit of the Sodalities as the spirit of the Jesuits. In fact, the 1550 foundational formula for the Jesuits stated that the order had been “founded chiefly … for the defense and propagation of the faith” (Cons. 3). The hope was that, in the current atmosphere -- where attacks on the faith were multiplying -- the youth would also learn how to “defend and propagate” the faith.

Chang did not stop there. For, even as the Sodalities were coming back to life, Chang also rallied around himself a leadership team of eight Shanghai Jesuits, the pride of Catholic Shanghai. They were native-born and highly educated; six of them had received advanced degrees from abroad. This team found creative ways to mobilize the Catholic Youth of the city. To this end, by the summer of 1950, the team organized a retreat movement. In these retreats, students learned how to strengthen their faith in difficult times. The students were expected to attend two three-day retreats each year. In time, two thousand students (split equally between elementary school students and their seniors) would be active members of this retreat movement. In direct response to the Communist vanguard, they saw themselves as a Catholic vanguard. In fact, Catholics boasted of the similarities between CCP indoctrination and their own religious formation. An internal church document would later claim: “At the time when the Communist militants were attending very tough formative retreats, the Catholics were happy, for their part, to find new strength in a serious retreat.”

This last observation was not accidental, as there is solid evidence that Chang had a further motivation to mobilize the Catholic Youth. For Chang was not only an astute student of Communist policy, he also studied Communist tactics as well. For years, he had observed the success of underground Communist cells with their hierarchical and compartmentalized structures. They were nearly unbreakable. Chang also became convinced that Communists had penetrated every level of the Nationalist government. This had accounted for the Nationalists’ ultimate demise. The Church need not -- Chang would have argued -- infiltrate the Communist Party. However, she should employ the tried and true tactics of the cell groups. They would form a pyramidal structure with Bishop Ignatius Kung Pinmei and the Shanghai Jesuit leadership team at the top. Next would come division leaders comprised of university students who, in turn, would direct the high school and middle school team leaders. In addition, there were “special militants.” This elite vanguard would function where priests could no longer go. They were to remain secret even to themselves, often known only to their Jesuit spiritual directors. Chang, it was clear, was mimicking the Communist cell groups. These Catholic cells would weather extreme persecution and carry on long after the priests and other leaders had been arrested.

The end result: as the Church was stripped of important assets, she compensated in other areas. She now had a vigorous and growing youth organization under the direction of Beda Chang and the Shanghai Jesuit leadership team.

* * *

Despite the increasing pressure on the Church on the part of the government, even as late as June 1950 there was still an uneasy coexistence between the two. It was not to last. For in the same month hostilities broke out on the Korean peninsula. CCP religious policies hardened. There is still debate as to whether the regime would have carried out its radical policies in any case -- that is, whether the Korean War simply provided a pretext to hasten the social transformation promised from the beginning.

In the event, CCP policies lurched to the left, and they directly affected Beda Chang. Thus far his “middle position” had worked; now the pressure mounted. The government pressed him, as a high school principal, to recruit “volunteers” to fight in Korea. Rallies were held on school grounds. In response, Chang and other Jesuits decided to leave the recruitment of the Korean “volunteers” to the school’s political instructors. Some party members construed this as obstruction of party directives. Government officials plotted their moves. At a December send-off ceremony for the Korean “volunteers,” a young CCP cadre planned to attack Chang for blocking the volunteer movement. Chang spoke first. He congratulated all the youth who had volunteered to go to Korea. Remarkably, they had done this by their own free will, for he had done nothing to persuade them to volunteer. Chang had maneuvered deftly.

But such deft maneuvering could not succeed indefinitely. There was soon more serious conflict. In February 1951, the party called together the directors of private secondary schools. Among the five Catholic representatives was Beda Chang. By the end of the meeting, a motion was proposed that Catholics should promote the Three-Self Patriotic Movement (TSPM).

The TSPM had begun in the Protestant churches, and called on them to sever ties with foreign mission boards. In reality, they were to prove their patriotism by submitting directly to the state. Some Protestant churches acquiesced, others resisted. The Catholics rejected the TSPM outright, for it called on them to sever ties with the pope and the universal Church. As such, it contradicted Church doctrine. In good conscience, Catholics could not support the motion. An argument ensued at the meeting. Chang defended the Church’s record. He spoke of the deep patriotism of Catholics. He spoke of the Catholic Brigade in the recent war against Japan, and of the charitable works of the Church. J.C. Coulet quotes Chang as saying “Our love for our country springs from what is deepest in our Catholicism: our love of God.” Catholics ultimately rejected the motion to support the movement. It would put them into schism with the universal Church, they argued, and destroy the “indefectible” unity owed their Church.

The firm Catholic stand enraged the regime. It also led to the first arrests in the Shanghai Catholic community. Chang himself had clearly crossed the lines. A few months later, a list of his ten crimes was posted on school property. CCP cadres agitated for his removal as principal. Under pressure, Chang had no choice but to step down. Soon St. Ignatius High School was confiscated outright.

Even so, Chang still posed a threat. In fact, Hu Wenyao, an administrator at the Jesuit-run Aurora University and a recent convert to Catholicism, warned the party about Chang. Hu was now a leader in the Catholic equivalent of the TSPM. Jean Lefeuvre, in his Shanghaï: les enfants dans la ville, quotes Hu as saying: “If you cannot dispose of Beda Chang, all your efforts will come to nothing, for he will foil all your maneuvers.”

The situation became increasing dire. Already in February, the government had promulgated the “Regulations for the Suppression of Counterrevolutionaries.” The order was implemented in Shanghai -- with lightning speed -- on the night of 27-28 April 1951. Bright red trucks (called dahongbao -- “big red envelopes” by the local populace) cruised Shanghai’s streets day and night. By the time it was over, up to 20,000 people in Shanghai had been arrested and at least 1,000 of them were executed.

Catholics were largely unscathed, but three youth leaders were arrested at Aurora University, as was a French Jesuit who was an expert on Chinese law. In response, Chang decided to adapt the organization of the Catholic Youth. They were now to become even more invisible and agile so as to evade CCP scrutiny.

But the regime was unrelenting in its campaigns. Nationwide it soon targeted the papal internuncio to China Anthony Riberi, the Catholic Central Bureau (which served as the bishop’s coordinating arm), and the Legion of Mary.

* * *

The regime continued to promote vigorously the TSPM among Catholics. In order to succeed, it desperately needed to co-opt a recognized Catholic leader, preferably a priest, and have him head its Catholic branch. The CCP knew that the recent convert Hu Wenyao had little credibility in leading the “independent” Catholics.

It was in these circumstances that the three Catholic school leaders who had opposed the Catholic TSPM in February were arrested. Chang himself was taken on 9 August 1951, while he was quietly playing mahjong after lunch with fellow Jesuits in the faculty recreation room of the Jesuit School of Theology. Fr. Charles McCarthy, S.J., the rector of the school of theology, would later write: “can’t say we’ll see him again.” This much proved to be true.

The government did not announce Chang’s arrest in the newspapers. Catholics speculated that the reason might have been that, in police custody, Chang would break and become the cooperative clerical leader the government needed. Little is known of what happened to Chang during his four months in the Ward Road Jail, a vast British-built prison in the north of the city. Coulet reconstructs his final weeks.

…every effort was made to break his will and to use him in spite of himself. Nights on nights of interrogation followed his refusal, when lack of sleep and continual tension combined to wear down the last resources of his bodily strength. Fellow prisoners heard him, exhausted and at the end of his strength, repeating simply over and over again “Jesus, Mary and Joseph, help me.”

Then Coulet speculates on the exact cause of his death:

The constant lack of sleep poisoned his nervous system, and Father Beda fell into a coma. Fearing that he would die before they had had their way with him, the authorities ordered his immediate removal to the prison hospital. But it was already too late …

At 8 a.m. on 11 November Beda Chang lay dead. The official cause of death was encephalitis. About 5:30 p.m. that same day, a policeman went to the Jesuit residence in Xujiahui to convey the news. Several Jesuits went with Chang’s brother to the prison. There they found Chang’s body stretched out in the prison courtyard. There were no overt signs of torture, but there were unmistakable signs of starvation and exposure. Even Chang’s brother, a medical doctor, did not recognize the blackened and emaciated body.

The Catholic community was outraged. By early morning of the twelfth, numerous young people and local Catholics gathered at St. Ignatius High School chapel. Word of the event spread through the Catholic Youth chain of command. The crowds gathering at the high school chapel grew larger and larger. “Where is the body?” the students yelled. At first, the police had promised to turn over the body, but now they feared a civil disturbance. They sent out undercover agents to sense the mood of the crowd. Aware of the volatile situation, the police reneged on their promise to turn over the body. They then dispersed the crowd.

According to Coulet, the following day three thousand people thronged St. Ignatius Church. Boys wore black armbands and girls put the “traditional white knot of mourning” in their hair. The Jesuit mission superior celebrated the Mass and Bishop Ignatius Kung gave the absolution. It was not until late that night, and in great secrecy, that several priests and some immediate family were finally allowed to bring Chang’s body to the cemetery.

The following day the youth had their own funeral Mass at the Shanghai church of Christ the King. The priests celebrated the Mass of the Holy Cross with red vestments -- the liturgical color for martyrs -- in place of the customary black. The following day another Mass was held at St. Peter’s Church with many Aurora University students attending. For their part, the students continued to wear black armbands to demonstrate both their respect and their defiance.

McCarthy would write his Provincial on 24 November 1951:

We have had much touching evidence of the admiration and affection which the people had for the dear good Chinese Father who died ‘in vinculis’ [in prison] on the 11th. The Masses of requiem were thronged beyond precedent, with crowds devout, earnest -- of men and young people especially. Newspapers carried some articles to smear his name, but they are taken at their worth. The incident will fill a page of exceptional beauty in the history of the Chinese Church and of the Society. Probably there will be more like it, before long.

These requiem Masses, “thronged beyond precedent,” took place throughout the city. Finally, the CCP moved to end them. The police called in the pastor of Sacred Heart Church in Hongkou and questioned him about the “criminal” Chang. Then the order went out: no more public Masses for Beda Chang. Priests who had been responsible for the requiem Masses were accused in the Communist newspapers, and the bishop was “questioned” on his attitude toward the whole affair.

The CCP published its viewpoint on Beda Chang in the 17 November 1951 issue of the Liberation Daily. The article was entitled “The Finale of the Imperialists’ Running Dog and Counterrevolutionary, Beda Chang.” It said: “Snugly hidden in Zikawei’s [Xujiahui’s] Middle School [formerly St. Ignatius High School] under the cloak of religion, the imperialist running dog and counter-revolutionary, Beda Chang, carried on anti-Russian, anti-Communist and anti-people’s criminal activities both before and after the liberation.”

It then listed a litany of his sins. In 1940 he “brazenly entertained” the Japanese. He sent youth “to the States for its slavery education.” He invited bandits “to give reactionary talks” at St. Ignatius High School. He also linked-up with the “American bandit Chiang Kai-shek” and the “criminal Yu Pin.” He distributed anti-Communist propaganda. He engaged in politics at the school by putting the “the school committee in the hands of reactionary, obscurantist, half-baked students, urging them not to let the progressive elements take control.” As a result: “After several interrogations Chang could see the proof of his crimes without any hope of refuting the accusations. But the criminal Chang died of encephalitis before the court could deal out punishment to him.” The article ends on an exasperated note. “They [the Catholics] would have it that this criminal counter-revolutionary is a ‘Saint.’”

Needless to say, the Catholic perspective, found in a China Missionary Bulletin editorial, was quite different: “His sermon is endless now, written in eternity for the ears of men and angels with the last free gift he had to give to God -- his life.” Catholics now believed that Beda Chang would intercede for them from heaven.

For their part, the last thing that the regime wanted was a martyr for the faith. The police called in a representative of the bishop and asked if Chang would be canonized a saint. They were told that the bishop had no such authority. Later, the police told the representative that the bishop would be held responsible for any miracles performed by Beda Chang. It was more than ironic to see the fear the atheistic cadres had for possible miracles. Beda Chang was proving to have more spiritual authority in heaven!

From the time of his burial onward, Catholics made pilgrimages to Chang’s unmarked gravesite. In response, the police stationed armed guards there. The irony was not lost on Catholics -- whose memories reach back to an earlier Victim with guards placed outside his tomb.