History OFFERS the best reference for crisis management in times of upheaval. This is particularly true for Christian churches in Hong Kong under China’s draconian security rule.
Last month, Monsignor Javier Herrera-Corona, previously the Vatican’s unofficial envoy in Hong Kong, warned that the territory’s further political integration with China would surely lead to autocratic restrictions on religious activities, and the Catholic Church should be prepared.
Worse still, Beijing and its public security agents in Hong Kong publicly condemned Cardinal Joseph Zen (陳日君), a 90-year-old retired bishop, as one of the leading figures in the 2014 “Umbrella movement” and the 2019 democracy protests, even though Zen offered only moral and humanitarian support to victims of police oppression. In light of the government’s warning, local Christians would have to keep their heads down.
Even as Christians in Hong Kong remain a minority, it is a visible living faith. Churches in the territory provided vital relief efforts for countless mainland Chinese refugees in 1949. Catholics and Protestants in Hong Kong helped build an impressive structure of medical, educational and social welfare systems that healed the sick, nurtured the young and fed the poor.
Church leaders performed a delicate balancing act stabilizing church-state relations, but they are now waking up to the government’s fear over their global connections.
The territory is facing tremendous challenges under Hong Kong’s National Security Law. For the first time since 1989, none of the Catholic parishes, Protestant churches nor local mission schools commemorated the Tiananmen Square Massacre on June 4 this year.
The suffocating silence is forcing Christian agencies and churches to reassess their everyday operations in a restricted environment. Some foreign agencies have handed over executive and financial management responsibilities to their local colleagues to avoid suspicion.
Keeping Hong Kong out of the international spotlight is a top priority for the security regime. This harsh reality has made it difficult for clergy to keep politics at arms’ length, while defending church members critical of human rights abuses.
During this year’s anniversaries of the Tiananmen Square Massacre and the July 1, 1997, democracy rally, Hong Kong security officials ordered several political prisoners to tell Amnesty International and overseas churches not to publicize their cases in exchange for shorter sentencing. Such a manipulative tactic was designed to isolate the prisoners and weaken their resolve.
Despite Beijing’s intensifying ideological and political control of the territory, more Christians are learning the stories of martyrs in the Maoist era and the involvement of Taiwanese, South Korean and Philippine churches in democratic struggles. Reflecting on martyrdom and civic activism reveals valuable insights for empowerment.
The experiences of migrants and cross-cultural exchanges have transformed the Christian landscape. A significant number of Hong Kong’s Catholics and Protestants are from abroad, with numerous ministries for Southeast Asian domestic workers and for Mandarin speakers. Neighborhood churches often provide multilingual religious services in Cantonese, English, Mandarin, Tagalog and more.
Given Christianity’s cosmopolitan profile, China would need to think carefully before imposing mainland-style religious patriotic control in the territory.
Hong Kong Christians are part of global churches. They have lived with anxieties and on the stamina of their faith for decades. They have overcome great odds and are unlikely to give up now.
Joseph Tse-Hei Lee is professor of history at Pace University in New York.
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase
RSS