The Church has problems with China and the Catholics there, but they are different in nature from those with the SSPX.
Many people, rightly concerned about the life of the Church, have blamed the Pope for excommunicating the SSPX while maintaining dialogue with the Chinese Church, controlled by the communists.
It’s indeed a thorny issue, and here it is, very briefly.
The point for the Church is whether the bishops are in communion with Rome, that is, whether they were ordained by the Pope. If they are not, they are automatically excommunicated. The excommunication can be formal and extended to the community of followers, as it was with the SSPX.
For a more in-depth analysis, eminent theologian Father Lorenzo Prezzi has a complete assessment ( https://www.appiainstitute.org/vatican/lefebvrist-bishops-from-schism-to-heresy/)
The very substantial differences are as follows. The Chinese Catholics never officially challenged the Church’s doctrine, whereas the SSPX was born out of objections against the Second Vatican Council, which has led the Church for the past 60 years.
In fact, there are still differences in the Church about how open one should be about the Council (which introduced the Mass in languages other than Latin and, in general, the Church’s drive toward all the people of the world, not just Catholics).
In 2012, Pope Benedict XVI offered the SSPX a way back, a compromise. If they had accepted, a conservative interpretation of the Council would have prevailed in the Church. They didn’t take it.
Shortly after Benedict resigned, the Church decided to go in a very different direction with Pope Francis. The direction is confirmed with Leo XIV.
Now the Catholic “conservatives” (not schismatic or heretical) are more isolated. They can’t say, “We can’t be too open, otherwise the SSPX will go crazy.” SSPX has already gone crazy. The conservatives can either follow the Pope more closely or drift out of the Church.
The Chinese Catholics are not about the Council. The issue is about the control of the life of the Church in China. In theory, there are common points. The Church is interested in religion; the State is about civil rules. The friction is about the grey areas, as religion has an impact on civil life, and civil rules have an impact on religious life.
In any case, Chinese Catholics have no general influence on the Church, be they conservatives or progressives. The 2018 deal was signed to keep the Chinese Catholics (10 to 20 million; SSPX mostly has a few hundred thousand) in communion with Rome and to have their bishops ordained by the Pope.
Under Pope XVI, some bishops were illicitly ordained in China without the Pope’s approval. In 2006, Ma Yinglin (May 2006, Kunming): Liu Xinhong (May 2006, Anhui. In 2011, they did it too (Lei Shiyin, June 2011, in Leshan; Huang Bingzhang, July 2011, Shantou. Lei and Huang were excommunicated (latae sententiae).
But not all Chinese Catholics were, because Rome believed that the ritual happened under some form of duress, not out of their own volition, like with SSPX.
Useless to say, the situation of the Catholics in China is not ideal on many levels. But the Chinese Catholics are still in communication with Rome, and their doctrine follows Rome and the Council.
The decision was wise: better little communication than no communication. Historically, over three generations, a local Church torn away from Rome becomes something else. One example is the Catholics in North Korea. Before 1950, in a population of about 7 million, there were about 50,000 Catholics (0.6%- 0.8% of the total population). If only the percentage were kept, there should be about 150,000 Catholics now. They have long disappeared.
The Chinese Catholics are there, their bishops are ordained by the Pope, and their doctrine is in line with Rome. Not good, but not schismatic or heretical.
