In the social unrest that has gripped in Hong Kong in recent months, young people have become the focal point and many have directed accusations against them contending that some of them, in fighting for change, have promoted violence and damaged the social order. However, it would be quite superficial to view events from this perspective.
Triggered by the Fugitive Offenders and Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Legislation Bill, the unrest has not only hit the government, but has also deeply affected the thinking of many Hongkongers and others around the world. It began as a defence of Hong Kong’s core values and has been characterised as leaderless, and stirred up Hongkongers’ unique sense of identity.
Due to the many different stakeholders, fighting for reasonable rights has not been restricted to meetings of the Legislative Council or protest actions such as marches or demonstrations, but also permeates different aspects of daily life. In the face of this turn of events, evaluation and judgement cannot be made with a unilateral approach.
Over the past months, some of us witnessed the bright side of human nature demonstrated by mutual help and sacrifice; some say that young people are not stakeholders; some examine the deep-rooted causes behind the unrest; some propose giving up on young people; some suggest using violence to stop violence; some believe in using violence to create violence; some only look at the superficial signs; some emphasise the spirit; some care about the present; some place hope in the future; some pay heed to rumours; some stress fact-checking. In view of pluralism and division, attaining reconciliation and communion is easier said than done.
Given Hong Kong’s current situation, the voice of the Church has seemed relatively low-key compared to its involvement in social issues in the past. Earlier on, the local Church organised a gathering between young people and the leadership of the diocesan leadership. The event generated some concern and criticism, among them the small number of participants. This has occurred in Church-run youth activities in recent years and seems to indicate that young people have a problem with the participation of the Church in recent social incidents or movements.
Young people are increasingly concerned about society and the Church’s the role in it. Isn’t this a vision which youth ministry and social concern mission has hoped to achieve? Does the Church simply want young people to be passive and voiceless, only going through the motions during activities without thinking for themselves? Are young people expected to grow with the condition that they must live positively within a framework designed by other people? Should the participation of young Catholics in social movements be seen as the Church’s acts of witnessing? Perhaps these questions are not superficial, but rather, fundamentally question the Church’s ecclesiastical views.
During the previous liturgical year, the late Bishop Michael Yeung Ming-cheung declared the present liturgical year as the second Year of Youth and themed it: Practice, Belief, Youth to encourage young people to live their faith by learning Catholic social teaching and doing social service.
The Year of Youth is drawing to an end. The actions related to social teaching carried out by the young people and many faithful have already gone beyond social service. The beginning may predict the final outcome. If this is a long lasting revolution of Hong Kong people, the participation of young people must be recognised. They have conscientiously responded to what the Bible says, “Let no one have contempt for your youth” (1 Timothy 4:12). SE
