Some Reflections on Integral Human Development

It was a great experience to attend the two-day conference at the Holy See on 3 and 4 April 2017 to mark the 50^th anniversary of Pope Paul VI’s encyclical Populorum Progressio (See also Pope Francis' speech to the audience of the conference). Several speakers’ testimonies were particularly impressive and helped us reflect on how our faith should be connected with our ministries on justice and services while other experts’ speeches also gave valuable insights on how to integrate our faith, individuals and societies.

The most touching of all was to hear how Fr. Bernard Kinvi, director of the John Paul II Hospital of Bangui in Central African Republic, calmly recounted how he saved hundreds of besieged Muslims. He risked his own life and faced numerous death threats to shelter the people and negotiate with the militias. His calmness showed the huge contrast of the content of his sharing on one of the most horrific conflict zones in the world.

Fr. Kinvi’s calmness actually shows the kind of humility and wisdom we need to handle such difficult and dangerous situations. He also shows us how we need to take actions to help others but not merely saying prayers when we encounter situations that seems to be so difficult that almost everyone would think there is nothing we could do to change the situation with limited human capacity.

Another speaker Brother Varghese Theckanath, director of Montfort Social Institute and secretary of Gabrielite Secretariat for Justice and Peace – Asia Pacific Region, from Hyderabad, India, shared his experience on serving the most vulnerable persons, including children’s rights, women rights and interreligious dialogues and cooperation in India. Due to the complicated historical, cultural and religious structures in the Indian societies, he needs to think of various approaches to handle all these difficult issues. Brother Theckanath chooses to engage with the people to enhance mutual understanding of traditions and customs while discussing with them on concepts of gender equality and protection of children’s rights.

I was also impressed by the presentation by Fr. Andrés Fernándex Pinón, national coordinator of the Penitentiary Pastoral Care of Columbia – Fundación Caminos de Libertad, from Bogotá, Columbia. He has spent nearly four decades focussing on prison ministry. Jesus was a prisoner of conscience. Extending our care and love to those in prison can help the prisoners and ourselves rejuvenate our lives. He pointed out the need to monitor and improve prison conditions for human dignity.

At the end of the conference, when Cardinal Peter Turkson, prefect of the newly established Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development, told the participants that how the four organizations at the Roman Curia – Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care for Migrants and Itinerant People, Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Assistance to Health Care Workers and Pontifical Council for Cor Unum – were integrated to become the new dicastery last year, he described the integration as a “conglomerate” and the major work of the four original pontifical councils will remain as the integral part of the work of the new dicastery.

We have yet to see how the new dicastery will continue the important work of the original four pontifical councils. The name of the new dicastery though gives a significant direction on how the Church will continue its work on justice and peace and services. Serving the people, especially the most vulnerable people, in the spirit of solidarity and charity and upholding justice and achieving peace should be the integral development of human beings. That’s what I grasped from the speeches and sharing from the conference. Without any of the work of these aspects, we cannot say that we are working towards integral human development.

【義筆容辭】網上發言成階下囚

2015年12月18日發表於香港《公教報》 http://kkp.org.hk/node/9943 作者: 博 德
臉書（Facebook）現在差不多成了我們大多數香港人生活的一部份， 搭車上班、吃午飯、下班回家，總會拿出手提看看有沒有人like（讚好）貼文或相片，不論看了新聞後怎樣在臉書上破口大罵香港官員多麼不濟，批評政府政策多麼不堪，還不會想到會因為發表言論而被起訴，甚至坐牢。說到這裏，可能讀者還以為我在討論近日全城熱議的「網絡二十三條」（版權條例修訂草案），該條例故然令人擔心，二次創作諷刺官員或會帶來刑事責任，但在中國大陸，不用二次創作，在微博上發表一些中國政府認為不中聽的言論，不單會被刪貼或禁言或刪除賬號，甚至可能最終招致牢獄之災。 近日媒體討論最多的受害者是著名維權律師浦志強。在十二月十四日開審前，浦志強已經被拘禁了長達十九個月，期間，他的太太孟群和律師一直在等待，就像前陣子最終獲保外就醫的著名記者高瑜，就像自七月九日以來仍然被拘禁的維權律師王宇和王全璋等二十多位律師和維權人士，就像為勞工爭取權益而於本月初被抓捕的勞權人士曾飛洋等人，就像六四死難者家屬，或就像因土地被徵收拆遷而長期上訪的訪民，只要發表中國政府不喜歡的言論或引起大量公眾關注而大量轉發他們在社交網絡或媒體的訊息，不論所謂手法策略是激進還是溫和，都不幸地可能成為下一個被打壓的對象。 究竟浦志強作為一位律師，在網上發表了甚麼言論，要令中國政府非要禁止他再發聲不可？不像胡佳或劉曉波那樣因為發表討論政制和人權的文章而被因言入罪，浦志強被控的兩條控罪分別是「尋釁滋事罪」和「煽動民族仇恨罪」，對浦志強的指控只有七個微博，一共只有六百多字，內容全是譏諷式批評政府官員和批評政府處理針對維吾爾族和藏族的政策和做法。中國政府以言入罪的案件可謂比比皆是，大多這類案件提出的所謂證據，經常令生活在享有言論自由地方的人啼笑皆非，批評一下就會危害中國的國家安全穩定？對，中國政府在浦志強案更進一步向全世界說明，即使在社交媒體發表譏諷式批評政府的言論，即使加起來只有數百字，但因為發表這些言論的人是著名人士而被廣泛轉發訊息，那樣便構成影響社會穩定和危害國家安全而要失去人身自由。這樣便入罪的做法，豈不荒誕？ 再試想想如果我們在臉書上的發言，諷刺一下梁振英或吳克儉這些官員，便先被關押十多個月，期間家人不准會見，律師也要向警察申請才能會面，開庭只准家屬一人旁聽，在庭外的支持者被帶走，這是否我們想在那裏生活的社會？關注像浦志強這樣的中國維權人士，就像關注我們香港可能有朝一日會變成沒有言論自由的社會。 天主教正義和平委員會 www.hkjp.org

參與、反對、旁觀

雨傘運動過去一年，每個人因為參與程度或受影響程度不一樣，會有不同的感受。

過了一年，現在如果有朋友或家人在吃飯時提起雨傘運動，不論是支持或反對，總有一種怪異的感覺。身邊不乏不少朋友和家人對雨傘運動的感覺仍是當日影響了他們上下班，聽過不少朋友或家人這樣說：「爭取民主係好，但唔好影響到人呀嘛，咁樣搞到阻住人返工返學，咁樣好離譜，成班人唔知做咩。」又或者這樣說：「咁多人出嚟都無用㗎啦，大陸係唔俾你就唔俾你，咁回歸咗呀嘛，唔係點？緊係唔會俾你㗎啦，點會因為你抗議下就俾你。咁搞完而家又俾唔俾你呀。」還有一些人會這樣說：「香港而家已經好好啦，又咁多福利，睇醫生住醫院又平，唔洗好似喺外國咁要交咁重稅又要買咁貴嘅醫療保險。香港人仲想點呀？香港人就係太自由，成日去示威抗議。嚴啲管下等你哋唔好郁下就遊行示威就啱啦。」

一大班人聚集在街頭，當然會阻礙道路。但我們的生活和生命就只有上下班方便、等社會自己改變、住醫院看病便宜一點？我們真的認為等一下社會就會變好？等一下就會有民主？為甚麼旁觀的人和參與的人好像永遠都無法說服對方？

我們如何面對身邊的人對這場運動的看法？我們選擇逃避還是面對？我覺得必須要面對。

我想問問反對和旁觀的人幾個問題： 

1) 你認為除了上街向政府表達意見，還有甚麼方法？
2) 你認為民主是否不重要？你是否想過像在大陸一樣沒有自由的生活？
3) 你認為我們香港人只應當順民，乖乖地裝作沒事發生，在自由日漸消失的情況下，繼續只埋首賺錢？
4) 你是否有想過，香港沒有了原來的言論自由和集會自由之後，會是一個怎樣的社會？你是否也覺得沒所謂？
5) 將來香港如果變成大陸那樣，有人因為發表言論或參與集會要坐牢，或者社會充斥貪污，官員做甚麼都不用向市民負責而只需向黨負責，那樣的香港又是否你想看見？

Not only for HKU, but for HK

I am going to vote at the HKU Convocation EGM today, not only as an alumnus of HKU but also as a HK citizen.

The matter arising from the HKU Council's continued delay of the appointment of the pro-vice-chancellor (academic staffing and resources) is not just about HKU's governance. The attitude of the Council members who keep pushing to delay the appointment already reflects how the people in power are controlling the university's governance but they are not showing any accountability to students, staff, alumni and the general public who are all the stakeholders as HKU is a public university.

I'm a person who believe in procedural justice and civic participation. I don't accept anyone who acts like "I-am-in-charge-and-you-need-to-listen-to-me". If the HKU Council members really think they can provide a sound reason about the delay of the appointment, instead of waiting for the yet non-existent provost and deputy vice-chancellor, they should provide facts and reasons why they can come up with this decision.

Accountability is extremely important in governance. We can just ignore it.

Therefore, all HKU alumni should attend the EGM this evening and cast their vote (http://www.convocation.hku.hk/EGM/20150901/index.html), not only for HKU, not only for yourselves, but also for Hong Kong.

尋找港大記憶球

小時候聽家裡的大人說香港大學有多好，家族裡讀書最厲害的大表姐是在我出生的七十年代的港大畢業生，還要是拿獎學金讀書的，真正的天之驕子。我從小學到中學都是那種只是剛好能讀到好學校的成績，所以沒有想過能進港大。其實中五會考那年更是感覺渾渾噩噩，在男校讀書主流思想影響下，認為男孩子要讀理科才有出色，即使自己中三時成績最好的是文科，也最後選了理科，結果會考成續強差人意，以為沒機會升讀大學了，但中六轉校後成績有所改善，中七考高考時僥倖地考得算過得去，結果僥倖進了港大文學院。

進港大時是1996年，剛好是回歸前一年，經歷了政治冷感的中學教育後進大學，當時還是對社會和政治議題沒甚麼感覺。因為高考時其中一科就是讀心理學，所以在大學一年級時，除了修讀英國文學和比較文學的學科之外，也修讀了心理學。當時心理學的lecture和tutorial都是在Knowles Building和KK Leung Building的，我大部份其他選修的文學學科都在Main Building上課，所以會從Main Building經過太古橋去KK Leung Building。太古橋上的白油字 － 「冷血屠城烈士英魂不朽誓殲豺狼民主星火不滅」，我在讀大學那三年不知踏過了多少次，雖然當時經常只是路過，沒甚麼特別感覺，但這些字到今天還存在，可以說是永遠不會忘記的記憶球的一部份。

還有甚麼是不會忘記的？當年因為上莊，經常出現在Katso Soc房，很多時候只是和其他Katso朋友吹水，也有參加Katso不同的活動，我沒甚麼獨特才能，所以在Soc房和其他莊友和Katso朋友吹水，可說是當時最快樂的時光。另外，當年還甚喜歡研究電影文化和文學與文化理論，其實當時並非很看得懂那些理論大師的文章，但因為當時有一位很好的比較文學教授Dr. Xiaoying Wang，每次在她的文化理論課後，總會和幾位同學和研究生一起到Main Library旁cafe吹水辯論，總會喜歡拋拋書包，引用那些剛學而不太明白的文化理論文章，那是多美好的時光，從不太明白的理論中大家一起辯論，然後慢慢明白多一點那些文化理論，那不正是學習批判思考critical thinking最好的方法嗎？那一大堆記憶球中，儘管很多文化理論的具體內容已很模糊，但批判思考正是那時培養出來的。現在說來，還真的很懷念那段青蔥歲月。

回頭一看，畢業離開港大已經16年，雖然在港大讀書的時間只有三年，但過了那麼多年之後仍然與當年一起上莊的朋友繼續有聯絡，這些都變成了我的生活和生命的一部份，因此，當聽見有人說甚麼舊生是外人時，真是目瞪口呆。曾在港大學習和生活的人，現在卻可被認為是外人？那些不是港大畢業的校委會委員就是「自己人」？舊生就是「外人」？

作為一名港大舊生，我絕對不覺得因為我已畢業而沒有權利再關注港大的事務，在港大讀書的回憶永遠存留在我的記憶裡，當年的種種片段，成為不會消失的「記憶球」。希望其他港大舊生都尋找他／她們的港大「記憶球」，關注母校的未來。

潘嘉偉
香港大學1999年文學院畢業生
shamrock@graduate.hku.hk

‪#‎堅守港大百年基業‬

https://www.facebook.com/patrickkwpoon/posts/10153538197993695

Hong Kong needs new free English press

When I was studying in primary and secondary schools, my English teachers always asked us to find 10 vocabularies in each of the news reports or feature articles in the South China Morning Post and look out their meanings from Oxford English Dictionary as a weekly assignment. We were also encouraged to read the Young Post every day to develop our interest in reading English writings. As a Hongkonger, my native language is Cantonese. Learning English was so difficult for people like me as we didn't have any chance to speak English at home and we could live comfortably with Cantonese only. Being able to speak and write fluent English was considered, which I think still true nowadays, superior and to have better chance to climb the social ladder. However, I would say that many of my classmates and myself were not so interested in what was actually reported in the newspaper.

After finishing my bachelor's degree in comparative literature and English literature at the University of Hong Kong, I was thinking how I could find a job to further develop my interest in English writings other than teaching English, which many of my classmates did. So, I was immature and impetuous enough to spend my mother's saving to do my postgraduate studies in journalism at the University of Sheffield in the United Kingdom. I chose to study journalism as I was pretty fed up with studying the complicated cultural theories - with all kinds of jargons like postmodernism, structuralism, post-structuralism, deconstruction, semiotics, post-colonialism, psychoanalysis, feminism, etc. I found myself more interested in reading and writing materials with simpler English sentence structures. Also, I found myself more interested in facts and current affairs than literary and imaginative writings.

During the year of studying journalism in Britain, I spent most of my time reading the Guardian, The Independent, The Times, News Statesman, and sometimes The Financial Times and The Daily Telegraph. The investigative reports in The Observer and The Sunday Times were amazing. I was so much excited of dreaming to be even just an assistant in an investigative reporting team in a newspaper or magazine. Despite all the years of learning English, my English is still very much "Hong Kong English". However, the experience of learning journalism in Britain was really eye-opening. It's not the experience of living in Britain, which was tainted with lots of discrimination, but the experience of learning journalism and the experiences of doing internship at FT.com and the visit at BBC World Service had profound influence on me. After finishing my studies and before leaving Britain, I couldn't wait and sent my application to the South China Morning Post for the position of cadet reporter.

After I returned to Hong Kong, I was lucky to be given a chance to do a job interview and was even luckier to be offered the job. The cadetship was an interesting experience. Rotating to various desks - business, China, local news, political news, court, "Focus" section of the editorial page, and feature - it was such a great experience to learn from other senior reporters and editors about how to do basic reporting and writing features. Then, I spent about another 1.5 years at the SCMP as a court reporter before most reporters of the court reporting team were laid off at that time due to restructuring of the editorial office in early 2003. I'm not sure if any of the editors or reporters at the SCMP still remember me, who was just a very junior reporter at that time. But I felt much honoured to be able to work with some of the best reporters at that time, most of whom either resigned or were laid off later. Then, I changed to work in human rights organizations and left journalism. Over the years, I have been hearing more and more news about some former colleagues leaving the SCMP and great reporters like Jasper Becker, Mark O'Neill, Paul Mooney leaving the newspaper. Until a few days ago, four famous columnists Philip Bowring, Steve Vines, Frank Ching and Kevin Rafferty, were reportedly axed by the SCMP. I really feel that Hong Kong really needs more alternative English media outlets (while Hong Kong Standard has long been unable to compete with SCMP's monopoly).

Some people might argue that there are more Mandarin-speakers than English-speakers in Hong Kong. Why do we need another English press now? English, as an international language, is still very important in Hong Kong as we still need to communicate with people in other countries. We can't simply learn Mandarin and think that's enough for doing business as China and Mainland Chinese are becoming so self-sufficient that they might think they are the centre of the universe. Also, it's important to have an independent and professional English media to tell the international community what is actually happening in Hong Kong and what are the views of the Hong Kong people instead of only relying on the SCMP.

I'm just so happy and excited to learn that there will be a new and independent English media platform in Hong Kong - Hong Kong Free Press - and that it's getting more and more support not just from the expatriate community but also many local people in Hong Kong (including people like me who just speak and write "Hong Kong English"). The emergence of the Internet has significantly changed our habits to read news and our participation in writing about news and current affairs. I hope that there will be even more English and Cantonese media platforms so that we will be able to maintain our freedom of press and freedom of expression in Hong Kong.

大陸人如何看「雨傘運動」

2014年10月24日發表於香港《公教報》義筆容辭專欄 作者: 博德
刊登日期:	2014.10.24
執筆之際，香港的雨傘運動已經進行了二十多天，過程中學生和集會人士和平的表現令外國傳媒報導和一些外國政要讚賞，然而諷刺的是不少香港人只看片面和偏頗的電視新聞報導，或因交通受影響而對集會人士有不少怨懟。可惜，特首梁振英和香港政府官員久久不肯有誠意的與集會人士對話，激化警民矛盾。在這篇文章發表的時候，政務司司長林鄭月娥等幾位高官終於肯與學生代表會面，局勢會再有所改變。那麼，沒有享有集會自由的大陸人又怎麼看這場運動？ 當然在消息封鎖的情況下，大陸人更無法全面了解這場運動。筆者所能接觸的大陸人也只限於維權人士和使用微博和推特的大陸人，有些更勇敢地親身在香港感受這個行動，所以也只能從能夠接觸到的大陸人去理解他們對這場運動的看法。至於，那些到香港來買名牌的大陸人，我不確定他們有多了解和關心。在抗議現場，特別是旺角，有不少人懷疑有不明背景操普通話的大陸人在煽動反對集會人士，甚至有維權人士透露有公安向他們承認，有公安來了香港參與處理集會情況，令人擔心大陸黑白兩道藉機滲入影響香港執法。 迄今為止，在中國大陸已有超過七十名維權人士和藝術家因為飯聚舉牌拍照、詩歌會或行為藝術來表達支持香港的佔領行動，被公安拘禁，部份更以「尋釁滋事罪」被刑事拘留，其中以北京的打壓情況最為嚴重，近六十人被拘禁，當中十多人是在北京宋莊區的藝術家（包括詩人王藏）和一名德國週刊北京辦公室的助理；其他被拘禁的人士分別在廣州、山東、安徽、上海、江西、重慶、江蘇和湖北。另外，逾六十位人士被公安「喝茶」被警告不要去香港。 其他維權人士除了呼籲關注這些被拘禁人士，他們每天都緊密關注香港的事態發展，無不十分羨慕我們香港人還能享有言論自由和集會自由，也對香港學生們挺身無所畏懼地走出來表達清晰的訴求表示十分支持和讚賞，也對香港警察以催淚彈、胡椒噴霧、警棍來對待手中只有雨傘的學生和集會人士表示震驚，紛紛認為香港警察已赤化，並說若香港也失守，那麼中國的民主發展前境更堪虞。 香港有些人荒謬地認為，因為我們享有太多自由所以才出現佔領行動，並大力讚揚警察強行清場。當大陸這些嚮往自由和民主的人士也為我們香港的前境而擔憂，我們確切地感受到如果香港也不能保住這些自由，大陸情況將更慘淡，香港有些人卻更關心甚麼時候交通正常，只想繼續過著前景模糊的生活，卻對將來漠不關心。這樣的差異，莫不教人心急如焚。