陈枢机表示无论是对中国还是香港宗教自由和公民自由是联系在一起的
香港（亚洲新闻）-八十二岁的香港教区退休主教陈日君枢机与本社电话畅谈，讲述了致函教宗的马达钦主教的勇敢，信中上海主教要求教宗不要为他担心（马主教因辞去爱国会职务被软禁两年了）、继续向中国政府"宣讲真理"。提及中国与梵蒂冈对话的不明朗态度和问题；强调祝圣地下教会主教的紧迫性，他们甚至准备好了为宗教自由、为与教宗保持联系而被囚禁。
接着，陈枢机介绍了为公投毅走旨在督促港人参加民主公投；支持"占中"运动，要求普选特首、香港青年运动与特区政府的铁腕较量。北京控制的特区政府逮捕示威者、或许还会逮捕枢机："如果开始逮捕人，我就去自首。因为我参加了、他们得先逮捕我"。
陈枢机将为中国宗教自由、香港公民自由和民主而奋斗的努力结合在一起。"宗教自由与民事自由是密不可分的。中国没有宗教自由，因为没有任何自由。对我们来说，在香港的宗教自由尚未受到威胁。但我们失去民事自由、如果明天我们的政府不是我们自己的选的，我们就也可能会丧失宗教自由"。
以下为与陈枢机对话全文：
尊敬的陈枢机，过去几个月里，盛传中国希望与圣座恢复外交对话。奇怪的是，这一传言正值香港教会做出指出民主的鲜明见证之际。与此同时，中国教会遭到了许多压制，尽管民间社会中为人权而战的人越来越多、他们中接近基督信仰的人越来越多。
Writing in the Italian daily "Corriere della Sera", I took the liberty of suggesting to Pope Francis that if Beijing invited him to go to China, the Pope must be careful not to be deceived because for the moment I see no intention of sincere dialogue. They are only concerned with crushing the Church, as is the case in Hong Kong.
There were other times I have written to Rome reminding them of the method used by the Chinese Communists to win the nationalists: dialogue! They pretended to talk, but conversed while they fought and conquered. You really cannot trust them.
I think everyone in China, in the Church, understand me. Many post on my blog that I am right, saying: 'Yes, yes, you're right, the Chinese Communists cannot be trusted. The Pope should be careful".
目前，中国对民间社会、记者，包括教会在内的控制极其严格......
We must remember the martyrs of China. Msgr. Thaddeus Ma Daqin sent me a message to give to Pope Francis, not to be afraid to tell the truth, not to worry
about his situation, Msgr.Ma wrote "Forget about me, worry about the truth". He is a brave man indeed!They are destroying churches in China; smashing crosses; issuing a "Blue Books" in which they state that religion is a threat to socialist society .... This is not a situation that encourages dialogue. We must not delude ourselves. It must be said, however, that the funeral of underground bishop, Joseph Fan Zhongliang, last April, showed some agreement. They allowed the funeral, the gathering of the people, the Mass with priests and underground and official. I think this is due to public safety in Shanghai, which is quite reasonable, rather than indications of the Ministry of Religious Affairs or the Patriotic Association.
My impression is that where there is a large and united clergy, the Church can resist. But you have to encourage them. For this reason, we hope that the Holy See does not delude themselves with the dialogue, but trusts in clarity, truth, encouraging the testimony of the faithful.
For that matter, what should we be afraid of? We fear that breaking off the so-called dialogue, the government will go back to ordaining illicit bishops. So what? Those remain excommunicated and the faithful avoid them! And why are we afraid to ordain underground bishops? Because we fear that by ordaining them they will be sent to prison? But they are not afraid and say so themselves. They are afraid of Rome's silence, because they do not know if they are doing good or bad ... It takes clarity to be faithful to the principles of the Church. God's people in China deserve some clarity.
Of course, every effort should be made to foster opportunities for dialogue, but we need to stand in front of the facts: if there is no proof or sign of sincerity, this sham dialogue and pantomime act must stop. If there is no hope of this dialogue succeeding, we act as soon as possible because our Church is wasting away. We must pray because the situation in China is difficult, complicated and dangerous. At this time I would like to retire, listen to music, read books, and instead I feel the urgency of my commitment to the Chinese Church.
尊敬的枢机主教您还积极致力于香港民主
The most important point was to support the movement "Occupy Central" movement, who want clarity on the steps towards full democracy in Hong Kong. Over several months, they held a number of meetings to see which formulas apply to the election of the Chief Executive. Through an internal vote, they came up with three choices, all containing universal suffrage and the popular appointment of the governor of Hong Kong. The local government and the China want to impose a universal vote for a committee, in which candidates are chosen by them. Thus rendering universal suffrage useless.
With the referendum, the movement gave people a chance to express themselves. It 'was an enormous and expensive undertaking. Especially since the government did nothing to help.
You could vote online or at the polls, for those not familiar with the internet. But at this point there was a great division among the Democrats: some, whose proposal among the three choices had not been accepted, began to criticize the others saying that they were "too radical" and "impossible to accept" for Beijing. And there was a lot of division.
For my part, I suggested that the important thing was to vote, not the specific proposal. What was important was the participation: that means that the population of HK wants to decide its political fate. My proposal was accepted. And the divisions were put aside. Even those whose proposals had been defeated - such as some Democrats and the same Anson Chan [former secretary general of the government] - decided to participate.
After that the proposal was made to march through the city, calling the people to go and vote for this referendum, which while not official, was very significant. We marched for 12 hours a day, for a whole week.
尽管存在各种困难，公投还是成功了，大约八十万人参加了！
It was a great triumph of democracy and sensibility of the people of Hong Kong. To vote people had to wait maybe for hours on the internet, or walk far to go to the polls, which because they were so few, were not close to their home. Moreover, the schools did not dare accommodate us for fear of government reprisals; Instead, the Catholic Church made several locations available. In all of this, Catholics and Protestants have played a big part.
总之，香港人的公民意识在很大程度上觉醒了
Yes, and there are several signs. Before the vote, Beijing issued a "White Paper" which explained the "Basic Law" [the establishment of Hong Kong, which was approved by China and Britain, which guarantees "a high degree of autonomy to the territory]. But it's a really shocking book! Basically it says that on the whole Beijing controls everything and that even the judges should be "patriotic." So at least 1800 judges and lawyers marched in silence, all dressed in black to vindicate the autonomy of the judiciary.
Even the vigil in memory of the massacre in Tiananmen Square this year saw a greater participation than other years.
And finally, there was the march of July 1. Police and organizers contend the numbers, but nonetheless there was an ocean of people. People came out walking, waiting up to three hours before starting. It began at 3pm and ended at 11 pm. It all took place in a peaceful manner, even if the police arrested some people for having "slowed down" the march.
"Occupy Central" had proposed to block the road until 8am the next morning, to force the government to respond. I had advised them against it, but they did it all the same. It was a 'trial run' for the sit in that they plan to stage in the center in future. Everything happened in a peaceful manner, but the police arrested more than 500 people, including some members of parliament and three members of the Diocesan Commission for Justice and Peace.
您怎样看待未来？
Our march, the one made by myself and other Catholics to entice people to vote for the referendum, has been described as "illegal", so now we risk being jailed! If they begin to arrest people, then I am going to hand myself in because I took part. They have to arrest me first. The government is plainly afraid of this movement and is trying to discourage and threaten it in every possible way. But the people are not afraid. For example, after the arrests on the evening of July 1, others presented themselves to police and demanding to be arrested and so were also imprisoned.
Those responsible for "Occupy Central", a Protestant pastor and two university professors, have to go to discuss our three proposals with the government. The project is this: we will present the proposal that took the most votes in the referendum. That was the "three lanes", which provides consultation and popular vote for the parliament and the commission. If the government accepts our proposal, fine. If the counterproposal is unacceptable and does not meet the universal democratic standard, then we will occupy the center with at least 10 thousand people.
If the government emerges with a Democratic proposal, but different from ours, we will propose this to people to vote for either one or the other.
Here in Hong Kong, there is some criticism from some sections of the business world, but the opponents of the government's attitude are many more and better qualified. Let's just hope that by the government will not stoop to using force.
