在网上流传一段访问中，美国神学家侯活士（Stanley Hauerwas）谈到雨伞运动期间香港有关他的诠释论争，有人以为他所关心是教会事务，不是社会改革，因此反对信徒参与伞运。侯活士强调这理解过于二元，他从没要求信徒抽离社会。他一向主张信徒以信仰身份介入，视众生为上主美好创造，同时启迪他们发挥想像力，省悟到暴力以外另有出路。
“I understand that there’s interpretive arguments going on in Hong Kong about how to read what I’m about. And the umbrella movement has some people saying Hauerwas wouldn’t approve of the umbrella movement because it’s all about church and it’s not about social Reformation. I think that’s an unfortunate dualism. I’ve always said I’m not asking Christians to withdraw from social engagement. I just want them to be there as Christians. And that means that you always have to remember that those that you’re opposing are God’s good creatures. And so you have to work in a way that helps them reframe their position in a way that offers an imaginative alternatives to what they regard as the necessity of violence.”
侯活士认为，他们北美信徒从未体会过香港信徒所受威胁，实在不宜指点港人如何应对。他只重申，非暴力不是一味被动，而是在暴力世界探求新出路的基本条件，挑战人们以另类视野看待习以为常的生活方式。
“There is no answer that I could give to the question however about those Christians that are threatened by violence in a way that those of us that live in North America simply never experienced. And I feel it would almost be an arrogant position for me to give people like that advice. But I want to say that non-violence is not passivity. It is as a matter of fact the requirement to be as articulate as one can to find alternatives that will make it possible to work for justice in a world of deep violence. And so I think that part of the challenge is to find alternative frameworks that simply haven’t been considered for some of the assumed places that it seems it’s either violence or injustice.”
某程度，侯活士这番话澄清了所谓非暴力实践其实比普遍理解的「和理非」有更高要求，既要有深刻处境判断和承担，也要求批判自省胸襟。
对于着重伦理反省的当代信徒来说，侯活士德性伦理无疑以目的论「另起炉灶」回应决疑论困境，为耶教信仰叙事和社群培育重新定位。然而，要发挥当中巧妙创造力殊不容易，方法上既要诠释传统，亦要诠释自身和处境，从来没有既定答案可依从。
说到底，在混杂的实践世界里，任何行动都要冒险，无论德性伦理或其他学说，都不保证幸福或正义，唯一可努力是方法上保持开放，行动上保持忠诚，在具体处境里尽量知行合一活出所信，人们自会透过信众行动看到信仰传统以至门派学说的影响。
（原载处境信仰资源库，蒙作者允准转载。）
