 |
朱耀明（中）与戴耀廷（右）、陈健民（左）一条心
美联社图片
|
编按：香港占中运动发起者之一朱耀明牧师，今早（9日）被裁定串谋犯公众妨扰罪，罪名成立。另被控的两罪煽惑他人犯公众妨扰罪、煽惑他人煽惑公众妨扰罪，罪名不成立。75岁的朱耀明在陈辞中，回顾他经历过的香港民主运动历程，期间多次哽咽，同为占中运动的发起者戴耀廷教授掩脸流泪，庭内哭泣声此起彼落。
朱耀明牧师说：
朱耀明陈辞全文：
来源：立场新闻
作为一个终生为上主所用，矢志与弱势者和穷苦人同行，祈求彰显上主公义，实践天国在人间，传颂爱与和平福音的牧师，垂老之年，满头白发，站在法庭被告栏，以待罪之身作最后的陈辞，看似极其荒谬和讽刺，甚至被视为神职人员的羞辱！
然而，此时此刻，在我心中，在法庭的被告栏，是一生牧职最崇高的讲坛，死荫的幽谷成就了灵性的高峰。
几十年来，讲道无数，想不到最费时、最用心、受众最多的讲道，正是在被告栏的陈辞，这里有我童年的故事、牧区的故事、香港的故事、民主的故事、最后一里的故事、雨伞运动的故事、人间和天国的故事。
古时的犹太人，期待救赎主来临的日子，那里再没有痛苦和眼泪，但基督道成肉身，住在人间，经历人世的艰辛，诠释了救赎主的真义：「那里有痛苦和眼泪，那里就有救赎主！」
在乖谬的时代，在专权的国度，在扭曲的社会，我甘愿成为一个勇敢的敲钟者，唤醒人间昏睡的灵魂。
这一切，从我童年的故事说起。
我的童年故事
我自幼失怙、失恃，幼时被送回乡间随祖母生活。
小学时，目睹残酷的土地改革运动，许多「地主」受公审，群情汹涌，有些即时枪毙而死去，有些不堪凌辱而自尽。
政治斗争下，田地荒废，人民成为牺牲者，挨饥抵饿，以树叶野果充饥。
替人看牛和种田，与祖母相依为命，小学教育在打倒美帝国主义的口号下完成。
祖母离世更是无依，她死前托一位乡里，申请我重回香港。担着自己的行李，步行了一天，才到达台城车站。
抵港第的一天，便上工当学徒，不甘永远煮饭和洗衣，出走露宿街头，替人擦鞋为生，饱受歧视，更被黑社会欺凌殴打。
有一年，患上风湿性心脏病，住院两个多月。
躺在病床，看见病友死前的挣扎，看见别人探病的亲友，我却孑然一身，伤心莫过于此。
我开始问自己：生存的意义是什么？生，仿佛是我个人的负累；死，可能是个人的彻底解脱。
就在我充斥死和解脱的念头时，一位慈祥的老人家，介绍我充当校工。主任是一位虔诚爱主的基督徒，常传福音，邀请我返教会崇拜。
耶稣说：「我就是道路、真理、生命」（约翰福音14:6），像痛苦尽处的灯火，给我生命的亮光。
我逐渐明白，我不能放弃，生活虽然孤苦，若然人间有爱、正道、真理、更高的生命价值和意义的道路，我决志跟随。
靠着上主的恩典，凭着信心，克服学习上和经济的困难，拿着离职的一个月港币130元的工资，开始半工半读，完成了三年高中、四年大专、三年神学院的课程，预备作传道者，服侍基层，与弱势者和穷苦人同行。
我知道，前行路上不再孤单，因为主与我同行。
我的牧区故事
1974年，我受托到柴湾浸信会服侍。
柴湾，一直被人视为香港的「红番区」，名称的由来，是由于地区人多挤迫，居民生活贫穷，教育水平低下，医疗卫生不足。
适龄儿童虽有学校教育，但没有家庭的爱和关怀，一家大小，挤在仅可放置一床一柜的徙置区，生活困苦，环境恶劣，青少年吸毒和犯罪率非常高。
还有不少家庭住在木屋区，夏天有风灾和雨灾，冬天深夜常有火灾。每一次，我到灾难现场，拥抱安慰灾民，都深感穷人的痛苦与无助，我会用教会慈惠基金，拨款援助不幸的灾民。
曾有一位弟兄向我诉说，他遭受市政署不公平对待，他的小贩摊档没法经营。他向自己教会的牧师求助，牧师却说：「我为你祈祷吧，祈祷过后，你就要去找朱耀明牧师了。」
这位弟兄来到我的面前，我跟他说，我们也祈祷。不过，我可多走一步，陪同他向行政立法两局议员申诉署申诉，结果把问题解决了。
身为传道人，不能对没有衣服穿、没有饭吃的人说：「『平平安安地去吧！愿你们穿得暖，吃得饱』，却不给他们身体所需要的，这有什么益处呢？」（雅各书2:16）
多走一步，教会应是散播盼望的群体；多走一步，教会应是拥抱伤痛的群体；多走一步，才是教会存在的真正意义。
我一心决志与民同行，多走一步，一起争取改善民生，争取兴建东区走廊，争取兴建东区医院，争取木屋居民上楼，争取改善工人生活。
希望，就在争取和奋斗的人当中。
但教会是保守的，对传道人参与争取的社会运动，总是有所顾虑。
当年，参与争取兴建东区医院时，我的教会正向政府申请土地兴建教堂，第一次接受电视台访问时，心里有点不安，担心政府视我们为压力团体，拒绝批地；担心我的同工和教友，对教会牧师参与社会运动，未能认同。
但圣经给我无尽的勇气和力量。
圣经记载，耶稣道成肉身，住在人间，他宣告：「传福音给贫穷的人…被掳的得释放，失明的得看见，受压迫的得自由」（路加福音4:18），这不是人类被救赎的好消息吗？
结果有权有势的人却带祂到山崖，欲置祂于死地，但耶稣并不惧怕，从容地从人群穿过去，走了。
我们生于世上的信徒，应牢记保罗的教训，他说：「我活着就是基督」（腓立比书1:21）
基督没有身体：
基督以你为祂的身体，
以你的双手完成祂的工作，
以你的脚走遍世界，
透过你的双眼，
把怜悯的目光投向世界。
－－大德兰修女（Teresa of Avila, 1515-1582）我被召为上主的仆人，效法基督，跟随基督的脚步，承托祂的使命，于世上传达上主的关怀，不应惧怕任何的政治压力和别人的评价。
多走一步，与民同行，就是一步一步追随基督。
 |
朱耀明30年來，是支联会的骨干成员
资料图片
|
香港的故事
我们这一代人，经历战祸，逃难来港，过着流离的艰辛生活，拼搏几十年以为可以安定下来。
中英政府于1984年签署了中英联合声明。中国收回主权，实施「一国两制」、「港人治港」、「高度自治」，并保证香港50年不变，但却未能完全稳定人心。
教会为此，曾推动「香港是我家」运动，以鼓励港人不要离去。
1984年9月，有89个团体集会于土瓜湾「高山剧场」，要求渐进「还政于民」。香港教会为稳定人心，于1984年也表达了清晰的信念书：
1997年后维持高度自治，市民享有神所赋予的人权、自由，包括言论、出版、结社、集会、出入境、信仰及传教等自由。
政府必须向香港市民直接负责；不单要致力于香港的经济发展，同样重要的是重视市民中沉默的大多数者的利益；并要继续保持立法、司法及行政独立。
信念基于我们的信仰：每个人都是按照上主的形象被造的。
因此，人人应受尊重和保护，我们致力争取民主，因为民主的理想是自由、平等和博爱。政治自由不是单一地对国家的效忠，也应承认人的尊严，而且人人生活在社会，都有其独特的潜力和能力，贡献和创建社会，而人权是上主所赋予，任何政权均不得随意剥夺。
不幸，1989年北京的民主运动，中共政权以「屠城」结束，目睹这场运动的结果，港人不寒而栗，对民主的诉求更为殷切。
当时，社会有要求英国给予港人护照，有要求1991年立法局必须由普选产生，八九民运之后，我主要照顾流亡的民运人士，拥抱苦难者。
1991年有地区直选议员。 1995年已增加直选议席。同时，1991年港督卫奕信签署了《香港人权法案》，香港既有的《社团条例》及《公安条例》所有抵触《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》全予废除。
普选有了进度和时间表，《人权法》使港人有进一步保障，我便少参与政制讨论，多致力民生工作，特别是医疗、善终及退休保障等。
我心中怀抱善良的希望：民主、自由、人权和法治，会一天天的好起来。
民主的故事
一切善良的愿望，竟然日渐渺茫，我又要重上高山，为了民主再启航。
圣经的阿摩司先知，最关心公义与公平，他目睹失序和荒谬的社会繁荣，只限于富有的人，穷人仍然受着不公平的待遇和压迫，他严厉警告世人：「你们要遭殃了。因为你们歪曲正义，剥夺了人民的权利！」（阿摩司书5:7）
香港有700多万人，人人生而平等，政府却剥夺人民的提名权、参选权。首届特首由400人选出，政府和人民没有任何关连。至今仍是由小圈子1200人选出。
政府眼中没有人民，人民也不信任政府，对于千百般民怨，特首一声「早晨」，就视而不见。
2003年「沙士」袭港，政府抗疫无方，结果299人死亡，1755人染病，董建华耗尽香港人的同情怜悯心，市民努力互济之时，他却硬推23条立法，导致50万人上街抗议，最后「脚痛」下台。
立法会保有功能组别，剥夺了议员的私人提案权，政府的议案只要掌握功能组别和保皇党的票数，很容易就可以通过，这种走向专权的制度，人民的生活较回归前更困苦，更无助，更伤心。
我们再不能沉默了，为平等的人权，民主必须多走一步。
本着争取民主的初衷，2002年，我们组成「香港民主发展网络」（Hong Kong Development Network）（以下简称民网），成员包括有律师、学生、学者，并由陈健民教授领导30多名教授，研究符合基本法要求的政制方案。
2004年4月「民网」完成了方案，准备呈交政府和公开宣布，让社会讨论民主政制。
不幸，中央政府却于4月6日释法，否定了2007和2008的普选。所有参与研究的学者非常愤怒，并于5月的记者会齐穿黑衣，宣告「香港民主已死」。
自此之后，我专心公民教育，发展教会的服务事工。
最后一里的故事
2008年，我做大肠钡剂造影检查（Barium Enema），穿肠钡入腹腔，即时要接受紧急外科手术，医生表示我只有五成生存机会。
徘徊于生死边缘，几乎陷于生离死别的时候，我嘱咐儿子说：「孩子！要好好照顾妈妈呀！」
感谢上主的恩典和医生的悉心治疗，救回我的生命。
病后，我心里只有三个心愿，做好教会退休后的交接工作；陪伴妻子和家人，特别两位孙儿，我很喜欢和他们游玩、嬉水；写一本关于民运的历史书，只此而已，我便满足了。
2010年我退休了，许多关心我身体的弟兄姊妹和朋友均劝我：牧师，你对教会和社会已尽心尽力了，够了，好好休息和陪伴家人吧！
2013年1月，当戴耀廷教授发表一篇名为「公民抗命：香港民主运动的大杀伤力武器」的文章时，我不以为意。
当戴教授于2013年2月提及邀请陈健民教授和我参与「公民抗命」时，我感到惊讶愕然。
我人老了，身体又多病痛，怎可能参与呢？唯有致电我的好朋友陈健民教授，征其意见，他竟然说：「牧师，我现在于巴黎，你先答应，待我回来，再详谈商议。」
身处管治失效，道德沦落，没有威信，强调斗争，不顾人民死活的政府，似乎无意实践承诺于2017年普选行政长官，故迟迟不提出咨询。戴耀廷教授和陈健民教授不惜为公义、公平牺牲，争取2017年一人一票选特首，我虽然已70高龄，但禁不了良知的呼唤，我绝不会让我的弟兄孤身上路。
还记得少年时，基督教我认识真理，离开孤单的人生；还记得教会内，基督训示我拥抱穷人，让他们不再孤单；今天，民主号角再次响起，我怎能让有心人孤单呢？
我的眼睛明亮起来，凭着良知多走一步，与民众多走一里路。
圣经告诉我：「…爱是出于清洁的心、无愧的良心和无伪的信心。」（提摩太前书1:5）
我本着清心、简念、分别为圣──无利益冲突、无权利欲望、无隐藏议程、决心为香港尽最后一分力，与港人再多走一步。
2013年3月27日，我们选择在教堂十字架前表达我们愿意牺牲和受苦的精神，
宣读「让爱与和平占领中环」的信念。
当日我的祷告是：
「我们以敬虔、谦卑和祈祷的心，我们没有怨恨；反之，我们心怀爱意，不打倒任何人，亦无意对抗和反对任何政权；反之，我们坚守法律，我们以身违法，为的是要突显目前政制不公义的地方。若果我们因此行动失去个人自由而能为今日社会和下一代带来更大的自由，那么，我们可能失去的自由，就微不足道，这也心甘情愿的！」
「我们选择和平非暴力的运动，虽然我们面对的不公义力量是那么巨大、掌权的人那么难以对付，我们绝不害怕和逃跑。我们可以重新肯定自己人性的尊严，采用和平非暴力的抗争，揭示不公平法律的不公义，迫使邪恶不能再躲藏在合法性的框架内。」
「让爱与和平占领中环」运动原是透过公民商讨、公民授权、对话谈判去争取普选，在迫不得已时才采取公民抗命。 」中央政府却于2014年6月出版了「一国两制在香港特别行政区的实践」白皮书，宣布「中央全面管治」，那么，中英联合声明中的「一国两制」、「港人治港」、「高度自治」呢？中央官员竟然回应说：回归以后，中英联合声明已失效。
从来没有想过，中英联合声明如白纸一张。
中央政府原于2012年承诺2017年香港普选行政长官，唯人大常委2014年8月31日的决定，全面落闸，封闭普选和对话之门。
「雨伞运动源于长久以来对政制发展感到无助、无奈和无望，渴求命运自主。」
 |
| 「雨伞运动源于长久以来对政制发展感到无助、无奈和无望，渴求命运自主。」 |
雨伞运动的故事
对话之路走尽了，和平占中启程了。
「让爱与和平占领中环」运动定于2014年10月1日举行，为此，我们于9月18日入信申请「不反对通知书」，9月25日和警方商谈安排细节。
9月22日专上学生联会组织一周罢课不罢学的行动，抗议831之决定，并于政府总部外集会。但罢课学生于9月26日冲进政府总部「公民广场」，学生领袖被拘捕，引发大批市民响应，挤满了政府总部外面的街道。
期间，市民高呼「守护学生」，要求即时「占中」。
9月27日晚，我们与在场的学生代表举行会议，取得共识，9月28日凌晨1时40分由戴教授宣布「占领」行动开始。但集会的人群开始离开，不久学联宣布这次是学生运动，并非「占中」。
9月28日早上，警方封锁所有进入政府总部的道路，意图孤立场内的学生和市民。
9月28日中午时分，消息传来，梁振英于下午3时30分召开记者招待会，我们围坐在「命运自主」台，见到警方似要准备清场。
因为这次行动不是「和平占中」运动，因此，我即时要求义工和纠察离场，不要被捕，否则无人主持10月1日的集会，初时三子建议我随义工离场。但最终决定，我还是留下来待警察清场，我们三人挠手坐在一起被捕。
我坐回「命运自主」台上，与学生领袖、泛民立法会议员、和陈日君枢机，手牵手坐在台上等待被捕。下午5时58分，突然听到枪声，夏悫道烟雾弥漫，站在前线的市民大声叫喊：「警察放催泪弹」。
依我们的计划，如果警方用武力时，为了保护示威者，我们会劝喻撒离，何况警方还举着「速离否则开枪」的横额。
陈日君枢机即时大声呼喊「不要作无谓牺牲，快撤离，我们不要为这不理性的政府作牺牲。」「现在不是牺牲的时刻，快撤离！」
此时，我脑中涌现北京天安门的景象，我心里说：「一定要守护学生，保护群众不受伤害。」
10月3日我们已开始讨论自首，唯不忍心让学生孤单抗争，故我们留下来。
10月4日下午我们知道驻守的警察没有食物，本于信念，任何抗争，我们都坚持不能伤人的尊严，当日下午6时前，便开通车道和海富天桥。
此后，我积极推动学生和政府对话：因为只有对话才可保障所有参与者安全，另一方面，为雨伞运动打开对话之门，促进香港和北京政府理性对话下去。
第一次原定10月10日，唯因10月3日旺角示威者被黑社会殴打而叫停。但我没有放弃，仍积极寻求对话。
经过多人和多番的游说和努力，终于再决定10月21日学生和政务司长林郑月娥公开对话。可惜学生不愿意再对话下去，良好的意愿落空，我忧心忡忡，不得安睡，我们三人多次与陈日君枢机和李柱铭先生一起祷告，求上主保护学生和示威群众，并祈求上主指引前路。
群众无畏无惧，没有撤离，87枚催泪弹「催逼」了10多万人上街──波澜壮阔的雨伞运动开展了。
雨伞原是用来遮太阳、挡风雨，但在运动期间，在警方猛烈喷射胡椒喷雾下却产生保护作用。
雨伞运动源于长久以来对政制发展感到无助、无奈和无望，渴求命运自主。
79日占领，120万人参与，展示香港和平非暴力的高质素公民，期间没有破坏任何建筑物，或焚烧任何物件。
占领区的商店不但无损，反而占领者鼓励和帮助小店，以免生意受影响。很多商店和市民送饭、送水、送棉被、送帐幕，占领者充份发挥互助互爱的精神。
虽历经黑社会的暴力袭击，警察亦以暴力打得占领者头破血流，但占领者仍保持和平非暴力的信念，没有退缩。
和平非暴力的公民抗命种籽，已深植人心。
这运动原是一场公民觉醒运动，期望每个人都能出来贡献自己，表示决心，更希望能唤醒官僚的良知。
幸福和美好的和平生活，是我们梦寐以求的，也是上主的旨意，我们要践行在人间。
没有公义，便没有和平，因为「公义的果实是平安；公义的效果是平静和安稳，直到永远」（以赛亚书32:17）同时，「慈爱和诚实彼此相遇；公义与和平彼此相亲。 」（诗篇85:10）
法律和秩序是任何社会不可或缺的。若法律只用作维护权贵既得利益者，不法和霸道便由制度肯定，社会道德基础便荡然无存，无权无势者就成为法治制度的牺牲品。
那么，政权只会借国家安全的名义：以迫害、流放、任意逮捕、刑求、强逼失踪、破坏和暗杀来维持所谓「和平」。 （C. René Padilla）
或许您们会说：我们的问题源自「公民抗命」。
错了！
我们的问题，乃是来自「公民从命」。
这种从命，让世上无数的人屈膝于强权，独裁者的政体之下，被卷进死伤以百万计的战争。
这种从命，让世上无数的人对贫穷、饥饿、愚昧、战祸与残暴无动于衷。
这种从命，让世上的监牢挤满小奸小恶的罪犯：大奸大恶者，却成为国家的领袖。
—历史学家霍华德．津恩（Howard Zinn）「我，朱耀明、戴耀廷和陈健民现在于被告栏宣告：我们没有后悔，没有埋怨，没有愤怒，没有遗憾，没有放弃。」
 |
我，朱耀明、戴耀廷和陈健民现在于被告栏宣告：
我们没有后悔，没有埋怨，没有愤怒，没有遗憾，没有放弃
|
最后的总结陈辞
今日是2019年4月9日，想起51年前的4月4日，主张和平非暴力争取人权的马丁路德金牧师被人枪杀，先贤的说话仍在鼓励和呼召我们：
「……我们要抵抗，因为自由永远不是白白赋予的。有权有势的欺压者从不会自动双手赠献自由给受压者……权益和机会必须通过一些人的牺牲和受苦才可以获致。」
「……仇恨生仇恨，暴力生暴力……我们要用爱的力量去对付恨的势力。我们的目标绝不是要去击败或羞辱白人，相反，我们要去赢取他们的友谊和谅解。」
马丁路德金牧师说：没有公义便没有真正的和谐。我寄语生活于香港的市民，要怜悯不公义制度下的受害者，包括示威者，也包括警察；我更祈求怜悯能激发勇气，用以对抗制度的恶。
雨伞运动中，我只是一个敲钟者，希望发出警号，让人们知道不幸和灾难正在发生，期望唤醒人们的良知，共挽狂澜。
如果我仍有气力，必继续在教会敲钟，在世上敲钟，在人心敲钟。
「世人哪，耶和华已指示你何为善。他向你所要的是什么呢？只要你行公义，好怜悯，存谦卑的心与你的上主同行。」（弥迦书6:8）
我，朱耀明、戴耀廷和陈健民现在于被告栏宣告：
我们没有后悔，
我们没有埋怨，
我们没有愤怒，
我们没有遗憾。
我们没有放弃。
耶稣说：「为义受迫害的人有福了！因为天国是他们的。」（马太福音5:10）
慈爱，公义的上主，我将自己交托祢手中，愿袮的旨意成就！
Confessions of a Bell Toller －a statement from the Defendant’s Dock
I am a Christian minister committed to the service of God. I have resolved to live a life of friendship with the weak and the poor, praying that God’s justice be manifested on earth as it is in heaven, and that the gospel of love and peace be proclaimed among the people. But today, old and grey, I find myself in the Defendant’s dock, making a final plea as a convict. It looks so absurd, if not outright shameful for a person holding holy office.
And yet, at this very moment, my heart tells me that with this defendant’s dock, I have found the most honourable pulpit of my ministerial career. The valley of the shadow of death leads to spiritual heights.
For decades, I have preached numerous sermons. Little could I anticipate that the one message which preparation took me the longest time and the most heartfelt prayer, and which probably would reach the largest audience, is precisely this one delivered from the Defendant’s dock. In this message I tell the story of my childhood, of the Umbrella Movement, a story of heaven and earth.
In days of old, Jewish people longed for the coming of the Redeemer when there would be no more pain and tears. Then Christ, Incarnate, took on human flesh and lived among us, sharing in our suffering and pain. And the world has since learned that “where there is suffering and tears, there is the Redeemer.”
Ours is an age of absurdity. Living in a society on the brink of authoritarianism and of arbitrary rule, let me be a brave bell toller, ringing, waking up sleepy souls.
All these began with the story of my childhood.
My childhood story
I was destitute when young. There was no one to depend on. I was sent to live with my grandmother in a mainland village.
At primary age, I witnessed the brutality of the land reform movement. Many ‘land owners’ were brought before raging public trials, some summarily executed on the spot. Some committed suicide after suffering unbearable acts of humiliation.
Government often incited people to engage in political struggles. Fields were left untended, food production neglected. Hunger struck. People survived on tree leaves and wild fruits. There were nothing but lambs on the altar of sacrifice.
I completed primary schooling under the banner of [ Down with American Imperialism ] Became a hired hand in working in the fields, herding buffalo. With my grandmother, I survived. She survived. A case of sharing in destitution.
Grandmother died. I was all alone. But at her sickbed, she asked a neighbour to help me apply for return to Hong Kong. Bag in hand, I walked an entire day to reach Taishing bus station.
Day One, I got myself taken in as an apprentice. But the job called for nothing but cooking meals and washing clothes. I walked out, joined the street-sleepers crowd, and became a shoe-shine boy. I was looked down upon and constantly beaten by triads.
One day, I found myself running a fever. It turned out to be some kind of rheumatic heart disease. I was hospitalised for two months.
Bed-riddden in a crowded ward, I saw patients struggling with death and others being visited by relatives and friends. I was all by myself. Nothing hurts more than that.
I began asking myself: does life have any meaning? To me personally, life seems like a burden; and death a thorough liberation.
As I was struggling with the thoughts of death and liberation, a gentle old woman offered me a job as school janitor. There on the campus, a senior teacher, a devout Christian, invited me to go to church.
Jesus said, “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life”. (John 14/6) The light at the end of suffering brightens up my life.
Gradually I came to appreciate that I simply could not give up. Life is hard and brutal, yet as long as there are signs of love, righteousness, truthfulness, I am resolved to follow the higher way.
By the grace of God, with faith, I managed to overcome my educational and financial difficulties. Armed with $130, my last month’s wage, I began my part-time work-study journey : 3 years of high school, 4 of post-secondary college, and 3 years of theological seminary. My resolve: to proclaim the Word, to serve the grassroots of society, and to walk with the weak and the poor.
I know that for the way ahead, I am no longer alone, because my Lord walks with me.
My parish story
In 1974, I was commissioned to serve Chai Wan Baptist Church.
For years, Chai Wan had often been considered a ‘red neck’ district. It was crowded, the population poor, education level low, public health facilities inadequate and few employment opportunities.
Public schooling was available, but family support often fell short. An entire family lived in a cubicle built for a bed plus a cabinet. Life was hard, the environment miserable. Drug and crime problems prevalent among the young.
Many families still lived in shanties, risking typhoons in summer and fire in winter. When disasters struck, I found myself at the scene, supporting, embracing, comforting the people. I felt their pain and powerlessness. The church would offer some help from its charity fund.
A Christian man once told me he had been unfairly treated by Urban Services. He could no longer operate his hawker stall. His pastor said, “I would pray for you. Then you go and see Rev. Chu Yiu Ming.”
So this brother came to me. I said I would also do the praying, but I would take a further step. I would accompany you to the UMELCO Complaint Office. There, the issue was later resolved.
To those who are naked or hungry, the Christian minister has no business responding with greetings of Peace, Peace. I wish you well; keep warm and well fed, but does nothing about their physical needs. What good are such greetings? So ask the Bible. (James 2:16)
Take a further step. The church should be a community which grows hope. Take a further step. A community which embraces suffering and pain. Take a further step. This is the true meaning of being church.
My resolve: to walk with people. Take a further step. Improve the quality of life. Build the Eastern Corridor, the Eastern Hospital. Public Housing for Squatters. Improve Workers’ Livelihood.
Hope. Nurture hope in the midst of people’s struggles.
The church, however, tends to be conservative. It worries about church ministers getting involved in social movements.
I recall in the year of us advocating for the building of the Eastern Hospital, my congregation was applying to the authorities for land. I was doing a tv interview. I found myself restless for fear that government might consider us ‘a pressure group’ and reject our church’s application. I worried that my colleagues and church members might no longer be able to identify with our mission out of fear.
But the Bible provides me with courage and power.
There, in the scriptures, it is announced that Jesus, God Incarnate, lived among us, full of grace and truth. Bring good news to the poor. And it is proclaimed that the imprisoned shall be free and the blind see, and the oppressed liberated. Isn’t this the good news of salvation for the people?
At some point, Jesus was taken by certain powerful and influential people up a tall precipice. They threatened to kill him. Unafraid, Jesus walked passed the crowd on to safety.
Living in this world of ours today, let us take heed of Paul‘s word: To me, to live is Christ.(Phil.1:21)
Christ has no body
Christ sees you as his body,
Your two hands as his hands to finish his work.
With your feet, He travels the whole world.
Through your two eyes,
He casts his sight of compassion upon the earth
（Teresa of Avila, 1515-1582）－－
I have been called as a servant of the Lord. In imitation of Christ. Following his steps. Taking up his mission. Making known his concerns for the world. Unafraid of political pressure or how others see his work.
Take a further step. Walk with the people. Following Christ each step of the way.
My Hong Kong Story
My generation has lived through war and chaos. We fled to Hong Kong, rootless and destitute.
In 1984, the Chinese and British Governments came to agreement and a Joint Declaration was signed. Hong Kong would return to China, and ‘One Country Two Systems’ , ‘Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong’ , ‘a high degree of autonomy’ and ‘No change for 50 years’ would be introduced. But public confidence remained fragile.
At one point during this period, Christian churches launched a ‘Hong Kong, My Home’ campaign to encourage people not to leave.
September 1984, 89 groups and organisations came together in Ko Shan Theatre, Tokwawan, calling for ‘Power to the People’. To build confidence among the people, Christian Churches proclaimed a set of basic convictions in the same year.
Post 1997 Hong Kong must enjoy a high degree of autonomy. God-given human rights and liberty, including freedom of the press and of publication, of association, of assembly. Citizens must be given the right to travel and to enter or leave the city. The freedom of religious belief and freedom to preach must be safeguarded.
Government should be directly accountable to the people. Effort must be placed not only on Hong Kong’s economic development. Of equal importance is the interests of the silent majority. The city’s legislative, judicial and executive branches of governance should remain independent of each other.
This is our conviction based on the faith we hold: Every person is created according to God’s image.
As such, every person should be respected and safeguarded. We strive for democracy, because democracy strives for freedom, equality and universal love. Political freedom is more than loyalty to the state. It professes human dignity. Every single person living in a community possesses unique potentials and powers, capable of making a contribution to society. Human right is a God-given gift, never to be arbitrarily taken away by any political regime.
By 1989, the democratic movement in Beijing ended sadly in brutal massacre. As eye witnesses, our hearts turned cold. Our democratic aspirations burned all the more fierce.
During this period, there were cries for British passports for Hong Kong people, and demands for direct elections for the 1991 legislature. After the 1989 democratic uprising, my principal involvement was the ministry of caring for democratic activists in exile, being with them in their suffering.
By 1991, some legislative seats were open for direct election. A few more by 1995. In 1991, Governor Wilson signed into law <Hong Kong Human Rights Ordinance>. As such, provisions in the <Societies Ordinance> and <Public Order Ordinance> which contravened the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights would be abolished.
With the promise of universal franchise for the legislature in place, and the enactment of the law on human rights, I reduced my participation in issues of political structure, and gave more attention to livelihood issues such as medical and health, palliative care, and retirement protection.
I fondly cherished the hope that democracy, freedom, human rights and the rule of law would find fertile soil in this city. That things would become better every day.
My story on democracy
As it happened, all these wishes of goodwill turned sour. Once again, I found myself embark on yet another journey for democracy. Once again, there is another mountain to climb.
Amos, a biblical prophet with a deep concern for justice and fairness, was confronted with the situation of wealth and prosperity going only to the benefit of the rich and the powerful. He thundered at them, ‘Woe to you who turn justice into bitterness, and cast righteousness to the ground.’
Hong Kong boasts a population of 7 million plus, everyone born equal. Yet, for the election of the Chief Executive, the right to make nominations and the right to be nominated have been taken away. The first Chief Executive of the post-1997 era was elected by a body of 400 people. No links exist between the people and the government. As of the day, the Chief Executive is elected by a small circle of 1200 electors.
For the government, the people are not necessary. Neither does the people trust the government. For the hundreds and thousands of grievances, the Chief Executive simply brushes them aside with a Good Morning.
2003, the SARS epidemic launched an assault on the city. Government threw up both hands. 299 people died. 1755 infected. While people fended for themselves in solidarity and sympathy, Tung Che-haw, the then Chief Executive, chose such a moment to legislate on Article 23 of the Basic Law. 500,000 took to the street. Tung stepped down, on the ground of pain on the leg.
The legislative council retains the functional constituencies and deprives law-makers of the right to introduce private members’ bills. As long as there is functional constituency and pro-establishment party support, government bills enjoy easy passage. This brews authoritarianism and disadvantages efforts to improve the quality of life for the people. Relative to pre-1997 days, life has become harder, people helpless and hurting.
We can no longer stay silent. For equality in human rights, Democracy has to take a further step.
We had not forgotten our first love. In 2002, Hong Kong Development Network came into being. Led by Professor Chan Kinman, over 30 professors came together to develop a political structure consistent with the requirements of the Basic Law.
April 2004, Hong Kong Development Network had completed drawing up its proposal on Political Structure, ready for submission to the government, and for release for public discussion.
6 April, Central Government announced an interpretation of the Basic Law. The interpretation rejected universal franchise for the 2007, 2008 elections. Sad. All the participating academics expressed their anger wearing black in a press conference in May. There, they announced Democracy in Hong Kong is Dead.
Since then, I devoted myself to civic education and to the social service ministry of the church.
My story of the last mile
2008. An imaging screening of Barium Enema found me on the brink of death. I was rushed for emergency surgery. Doctors gave me a 50 percent chance of survival.
Hanging by a thin thread between life and death, I called to my son, ‘Child, take good care of your mother.’
By the grace of God and the doctors’ meticulous caring, I was saved.
When this was all over, three wishes remained in my heart: do a good job for the church and find a successor; time with my wife and family, my two grand children in particular, I love to fool around with them at the beach; and write a book on the history of the people’s movement. If I manage these, I would count myself a happy man.
2010. I retired. Many of my friends and parishioners who worried about my health said to me, “Pastor, you have done your utmost for church and society. Enough is enough. Stay put. Spend time with your family.”
January 2013. Professor Tai Yiuting published his newspaper article on ‘Civil Disobedience - weapon of great potency for Hong Kong’s Democratic Movement’. I didn’t pay much attention to it.
February 2013. Professor Tai raised the desire of inviting me and Professor Chan Kinman to join him in a Civil disobedience campaign. I was taken aback, stone shocked.
I have come into old age. My body inflicted with sickness. How could I possibly make it? I called up my good friend for advice. To my surprise, Professor Chan responded with, ‘I am in Paris right now. You go ahead and say Yes. We’ll talk when I am back.’
At a time when government misgoverned, abandoned ethical norms, threw credibility to the wind and used confrontation tactics to divide and rule, it seemed there would be little chance for universal franchise for the chief executive election in 2017 to which the two professors were committed. For this just cause, Tai and Chan were prepared to pay the price. I was already 70, often sick, physically unfit. But I could not ignore the cry of conscience. I could never allow my brothers to go it alone.
I recall the days of my youth. Christ taught me what is true. I was no longer alone. In church, Christ told me to embrace the poor, so that they too would not be alone. Today, the trumpet call for democracy is heard once more. How can I leave these good men to themselves?
My eyes saw the light. By my conscience, I was going to take a further step. Walk the extra mile along side the people.
The bible instructs me “to arouse the love that comes from a pure heart, a clear conscience and a genuine faith.”(I Timothy 1:5)
So I resolved to follow with purity, simplicity and sanctity of spirit. No self-interest, No desire for power, No hidden agenda. My last oz of strength for Hong Kong.
March 27, 2013. By the cross in a church, we read out a statement ‘Occupy Central with Love And Peace’, declaring our commitment to non-violent civil disobedience.
My prayer on that day:
We come before You and before the world with reverence, humility and a prayerful heart. There is no hatred. There is love. We are not here to knock down anyone, nor to oppose any political regime. On the contrary, we uphold the law, and with our body, would deliberately break the law, in order to highlight the injustice of the present political structure. By so doing, and if we hereby suffer the loss of personal freedom, and yet manage to secure greater freedom for the next generation, then, we would count our loss insignificant and our suffering worthy.
We have opted for a peaceful, non-violent way. Although the power of injustice before us is immense and those holding power capricious, we are not afraid, nor will we run away. We stand by the dignity of the human person and resort to peaceful and non-violent means of struggle. Our way is to expose the injustice of unjust laws, making it impossible for evil to hide behind legitimate fronts.
‘Occupy Central with Love and Peace’ operates by citizens deliberation, authorisation, and dialogue. It’s goal is election by universal franchise. Civil Disobedience would be acts of final resort.
June 2014. Central Government published a white paper on ‘The Practice of One Country Two Systems in the HKSAR, with an emphasis on Beijing’s ‘comprehensive rule’ over Hong Kong. As it is, we venture to ask, ‘what about references in the Sino-British Joint Declaration to ‘one country two systems’, ‘Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong’ and ‘high degree of autonomy’? The reply from a central government official: ‘With the resumption of sovereignty, the Joint Declaration is no longer effective.’
Little could we imagine that the Joint Declaration is nothing more than a sheet of paper.
2012. Central Government made the promise of universal franchise for the 2017 chief executive’s election.
31 August, 2014. The Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress closed all such possibilities. No universal franchise. No further discussion.
My story of the umbrella movement
The road of dialogue came to a dead end. The beginning of peaceful Occupy Central.
Occupy Central with Love and Peace was set to commence on 1 October. For that we submitted an application to the police for a ‘No Objection Notice’. Discussions with police on operational details were scheduled for 25 September.
22 September, the Federation of Post-Secondary Students called for a week-long class against the 831 decision. Students congregated outside Government Headquarters.
26 September, students on strike rushed into CitizensSquare. Leaders were arrested. Members of the public gathered in support of the students in large numbers, blocking the roads in the vicinity.
The rallying cry: Stand Guard Over Our Students. There were calls for the immediate occupation of Central.
27 September. We met with student representatives on the spot and reached consensus. Professor Tai would announce the commencement of ‘Occupy’ action as of 0140 hr 28 September. But no sooner, the crowd began to disperse. And Federation leaders declared that this was student’s movement, not ‘Occupy Central’.
28 September morning. Police blockade of access to Government Main Complex, with the intention to isolate students and members of the public on the scene.
28 September. News had it that CY Leung would be calling a press conference at 3.30 pm. At the same time, while we were doing a round table on the theme of ‘Self-Determination’, we noticed signs of probable clearance action by police.
By now, and given that this piece of action was no longer ‘Occupy Central with Love and Peace’, I right away asked our volunteers and pickets to leave the scene, and not be arrested. We had scheduled our big day for October 1 and must make sure someone would be available then to lead the action. So initially the three of us decided I should leave with the volunteers. However, as it turned out, I finally stayed and waited for police clearance. Our decision was the three of us would stay, holding hands and be arrested together.
With that, I returned to the Roundtable Platform. There, student leaders, Pan-Democrat legislative councillors and Cardinal Joseph Zen sat, holding hands, waiting to be arrested. 5.58pm. Bursts of gun shots were heard. Masses of smoke began to encase Harcourt Road. People on the frontline cried, ‘Tear Gas. Police Firing Tear Gas.’
By our plan, had police resorted to force, we would advise retreat in order to protect the protesters. By then, police was holding up the warning banner ‘Disperse or Police Open Fire’.
Cardinal Joseph Zen instantly cried out, “No pointless sacrifice. Retreat. Quick. We will not sacrifice for this irrational government.” “Now is not the time for sacrifice. Retreat. Quick.”
At this point, the image of Tienaman Square in Beijing took hold of my mind. My heart kept telling me, “Must protect the students. Must keep the people from harm.”
3 October. We began discussion on turning ourselves in to the authorities. We couldn’t bear to see students continuing to suffer and fight their lonely fight. So we stayed.
4 October. We knew the police stationed there had run out of food. Given our respect for the principle of the dignity of every person under any circumstances, we agreed and vehicular access and a pedestrian overpass north of Admiralty Centre linking up Tamar were made available.
I began to devote more effort facilitating student-Government dialogue. I believed, without dialogue, the safety of participants could not be assured. In addition, the umbrella movement would benefit from an ongoing and rational conversation between Hong Kong and Beijing authorities. Arrangements were made for a meeting on 10 October. But it was not to be. Earlier, protesters in Mongkok had been beaten up by triad elements. I refused to give up, still striving for dialogue.
With much persuasion and hard work, 21 October was agreed as the day for a public conversation between the Chief Secretary for Administration and the students. But the students felt they had had enough. No more talk. Our well wishes fell through. Darkness engulfed me. I couldn’t sleep. There were days when Cardinal Joseph Zen, Mr. Martin Lee and the three of us got together in prayer. We prayed for protection for students and protesters. We prayed that God would show the way out.
On the streets, the people were without fear. They were unafraid. There was to be no retreat. 87 rounds of tear gas propelled 100,000 people to take to the streets. Thus the beginning of the epic, iconic, exhilarating Umbrella Movement.
An umbrella is there for shelter from the sun and from the rain. During the Movement days, it was protection from police pepper gas. It all began with a student class boycott. Most participants were young people.
For a long time, young people have been made powerless, helpless, and indeed, hopeless before the reality of the city’s political structure. They longed for self-determination for their destiny.
79 days of occupation with 1.2 million people participating demonstrate the high quality of Hong Kong people’s capacity for peaceful and non-violent change. During the period, no buildings were damaged, and no property set on fire.
Business in the occupied areas suffered no loss. In fact, small shops were helped and encouraged by protesters. And shopkeepers and residents offered food, clothing and tents to participants. Often, it was a community of mutual caring.
There were instances of violence by triad gangs. And of police beating up protesters . Yet participants remained true to the codes of peace and non-violence. And refused to back down.
The seeds of peaceful non-violent civil disobedience action have been planted deep in the heart of Hong Kong people.
This movement is an awakening of the civil spirit. Citizens offer what they can, with conviction, expecting to call the conscience of politicians and bureaucrats to account.
Wellbeing, decency and peace constitute our common dream. It is also the will of God. Let us strive to make it real for our city.
There can be no peace without justice, because ‘The fruit of justice will be peace, the effect of justice will be quietness and confidence forever. (Isaiah 32:17) ‘Love and faithfulness will meet; righteousness and peace will embrace.’ (Psalm 25:10)
No society can do without law and order. When law is used only to safeguard the benefit of the vested interests, it would provide institutional approval to acts of illegality and domination. Thus the basis of social morality would varnish, and those without power become sacrificial lambs on the altar of the Rule of Law.
In the name of state security, a so-called “peace” is maintained by persecution, exile, arbitrary arrest, adduction and assassination. （C. René Padilla）
Perhaps, you might want to blame all these on ‘Civil Disobedience’.
Wrong!
These our problems come with ‘Civil Obedience ‘.
With such obedience, countless men and women kneel before dictatorial political
powers, sucked into wars which kill and maimed hundreds of thousands.
With such obedience, countless men and women turn a blind eye to poverty, hunger,
ignorance, war and brutality.
With such obedience, petty thieves and petty criminals pack the world’s prisons, while
perpetrators of the truly evil are honoured as heads of state.
(Howard Zinn, historian)
Summation
This is 9th of April, 2019. 51 years ago, on the 4th of this month, a man of peace, an advocate of non-violent action for social change, was gunned down. The words of this great man, Dr Martin Luther King still speak to us today.
“Resist, we must. Freedom never comes as a gift. The powerful oppressor would never offer freedom to the oppressed with both hands. Rights and opportunities have to be secured with the sacrifice and suffering of some.”
“Hatred bleeds hatred. Violence begets violence. We must use love to deal with the powers of hate. Our goal is never the defeat or humiliation of white people. On the contrary, ours is to win their friendship and understanding.”
Rev. Martin Luther King once said that without justice, there can be no true harmony. I urge you, who find their home in this city, have compassion on the victims of unjust systems. They include the protesters, also police officers. I pray that compassion would generate courage in us to fight the evil of this unjust system.
In the Umbrella Movement, I am just a bell toller. I ring the bell. And the bell tolls. It gives out a warning sound, that something bad and disastrous is happening. So doing, I hope that consciences may wake up, and together we work together to save the day.
Should I still manage to find some strength in my ageing body, I shall continue to be a bell toller, in church, in the world and in each human heart.
He has made clear to you, O man, what is good; and what is desired from you by the Lord; only doing what is right, and loving mercy, and walking without pride before your God. (Micah6:8)
I, Chu Yiu Ming, Tai Yiu Ting and Chan Kin Man, from the Defendant’s Dock, now wish to declare
We have no regrets,
We hold no grudges,
No anger,
No grievances.
We do not give up.
In the words of Jesus, “Happy are those who are persecuted because they do what God
requires; The Kingdom of heaven belongs to them!”(Matthew 5:10)
Oh Lord, who is merciful and just - to you I entrust my life, may your will be done!
来源：立场新闻