Rev. Tom Honey: How could God have allowed the tsunami?

譯者: Inder Peng(彭) 審譯者: Ana Choi

I am a vicar in the Church of England.

我是一個英格蘭教會的牧師。

I've been a priest in the Church for 20 years.

我在教會當牧師已經20年了。

For most of that time, I've been struggling and grappling

大多數的時間我一直在絞盡腦汁努力

with questions about the nature of God. Who is God?

回答有關於上帝本質的問題。上帝是誰？

And I'm very aware that when you say the word "God,"

我很清楚知道,當一開口談上帝時，

many people will turn off immediately.

很多人會立即腳底抹油跑掉。

And most people, both within and outside the organized church,

而大多數人，無論是教徒或非教徒,

still have a picture of a celestial controller,

都會有這種印像:上帝是天國的控制者;

a rule maker, a policeman in the sky who orders everything,

規則裁定者;住在天上的警察,主宰一切,

and causes everything to happen.

命令一切事發生 。

He will protect his own people,

他將保護他自己的子民，

and answer the prayers of the faithful.

並順應酬答虔誠禱告的信徒。

And in the worship of my church,

而在我的教會禮拜中，

the most frequently used adjective about God is "almighty."

最常用關於上帝的形容詞是“萬能“。

But I have a problem with that.

但我卻不這樣認為.

I have become more and more uncomfortable

這些年來,我越來越無法自在

with this perception of God over the years.

用這種角度去衡量上帝 。

Do we really believe that God is the kind of male boss that we've been presenting

難道我們真的相信那個我們這些年來崇拜和禮敬的神

in our worship and in our liturgies over all these years?

是一個男性上司的形象嗎?

Of course, there have been thinkers

當然，有思想家提出

who have suggested different ways of looking at God.

不同的方式來看上帝。

Exploring the feminine, nurturing side of divinity.

試圖提出上帝具有女性面及培育面的神性。

Suggesting that God expresses Himself or Herself through powerlessness,

提出上帝會借由他(她)無能為力的一面來示現世人

rather than power.

而不是只有強權的一面。

Acknowledging that God is unknown and unknowable by definition.

承認上帝的定義是未知和不可知。

Finding deep resonances with other religions and philosophies

尋找與其他宗教和哲學更深切的共鳴

and ways of looking at life as part of what is a universal and global search for meaning.

是在宇宙間世界上如何看待追尋生命意義的方法 。

These ideas are well known in liberal academic circles,

這些想法在自由派學術界中早就眾所周知

but clergy like myself have been reluctant to air them,

但作為神職人員的我一直不願意公開這種思想，

for fear of creating tension and division in our church communities,

因為怕製造緊張和分裂我們的教會團體，

for fear of upsetting the simple faith of more traditional believers.

生怕打破了那些比較傳統的信徒們的單純信念。

I have chosen not to rock the boat.

所以我選擇視而不見,不要惹麻煩。

Then, on December 26th last year, just two months ago,

然後，在去年12月26日，距離現在僅僅兩個月前，

that underwater earthquake triggered the tsunami.

海底地震引發海嘯。

And two weeks later, Sunday morning, 9th of January,

兩個星期後，星期日上午，1月9號,

I found myself standing in front of my congregation --

我發現自己站在教徒們的前面:

intelligent, well meaning, mostly thoughtful Christian people --

一群聰明,心善,有思想的基督徒的前面--

and I needed to express, on their behalf, our feelings and our questions.

我必須要發表演說,代表他們,來抒發我們的感情和提出我們的疑問。

I had my own personal responses, but I also have a public role,

我有我個人的反應，但我也扮演著公共的角色，

and something needed to be said.

我是必需要說一些話的。

And this is what I said.

下面就是我所說的。

Shortly after the tsunami I read a newspaper article

海嘯發生後不久，我看了報紙上

written by the Archbishop of Canterbury -- fine title --

坎特伯雷大主教寫的文章--很棒的文章--

about the tragedy in Southern Asia.

關於南亞的悲劇。

The essence of what he said was this:

文中要義是:那些被海嘯摧毀所有

the people most affected by the devastation and loss of life

及失去至親好友生命的難民,

do not want intellectual theories about how God let this happen.

並不想聽思想學給他們一個合理的解釋:上帝為什麼讓這種事情發生。

He wrote, "If some religious genius did come up with an explanation

他寫道:「如果某些宗教天才能想出了一個好理由,

of exactly why all these deaths made sense,

究竟為什麼這些死亡是有道理的,

would we feel happier, or safer, or more confident in God?"

我們就會感到更快樂嗎,或者更安全,更信上帝嗎？」

If the man in the photograph that appeared in the newspapers,

如果在報紙上在照片中出現的男人,

holding the hand of his dead child was standing in front of us now,

那個手掌緊緊的握著他死去小孩的手的人,站在我們面前，

there are no words that we could say to him.

我們有什麼話可以對他說?

A verbal response would not be appropriate.

任何言語都不恰當.

The only appropriate response would be a compassionate silence

唯一適當的回應是充滿同情心的沉默

and some kind of practical help.

和某種實質上的幫助。

It isn't a time for explanation, or preaching, or theology;

這不是解釋的時機或說教,或佈道的時候,

it's a time for tears.

這是一個憂傷含淚的時候 。

This is true. And yet here we are, my church in Oxford,

沒錯,我的教會在牛津，

semi-detached from events that happened a long way away,

因為相隔十萬八千里,受海嘯災區影響微弱,

but with our faith bruised.

但是我們的信仰卻受內傷 。

And we want an explanation from God.

我們希望上帝給我們一個解釋 。

We demand an explanation from God.

我們要求上帝作出解釋。

Some have concluded that we can only believe in a God who shares our pain.

有些人最後的結論是相信上帝在分擔我們的痛苦。

In some way, God must feel the anguish, and grief,

一定是這樣,上帝一定會感受到我們所受的痛苦，

and physical pain that we feel.

憂傷,和身體上的疼痛 。

In some way the eternal God must be able to enter into the souls of human beings

毫無疑問的,永恆的上帝一定會探觸到人類的靈魂,

and experience the torment within.

且共同來承受痛苦折磨。

And if this is true, it must also be that God knows the joy and exaltation

如果這是真的,那麼上帝一定知道喜悅和

of the human spirit, as well.

激勵人們的兩個精神領域。

We want a God who can weep with those who weep,

我們希望的上帝當我們傷心時陪伴著我們哭泣,

and rejoice with those who rejoice.

當我們歡樂時分享著我們高興。

This seems to me both a deeply moving and a convincing re-statement

對我來說,這重新撰釋基督教信仰的上帝的宣言深深的令人感動

of Christian belief about God.

和令人信服。

For hundreds of years, the prevailing orthodoxy, the accepted truth,

數百年來,正統的及已接受的真相便是,

was that God the Father, the Creator, is unchanging

上帝是天父,造物主,是不變的，

and therefore by definition cannot feel pain or sadness.

因此被定義成沒有疼痛或悲傷的情緒反映。

Now the unchanging God feels a bit cold and indifferent to me.

現在這不變上帝令我感覺到有點冷漠,令人不解 。

And the devastating events of the 20th century

而20世紀的許多災難性事件，

have forced people to question the cold, unfeeling God.

促使人們質疑為什麼上帝那麼冷漠無情呢。

The slaughter of millions in the trenches and in the death camps

千百萬的人被屠殺在戰壕裡和死亡集中營裡,

have caused people to ask, "Where is God in all this?

令人們不禁要問:上帝您在那裡啊?

Who is God in all this?"

在這一切的痛苦中您扮演什麼角色?

And the answer was, "God is in this with us,

答案是:「上帝時時與我們同在,

or God doesn't deserve our allegiance anymore."

否則上帝不值得我們效忠 。 」

If God is a bystander, observing but not involved,

如果上帝只是一個旁觀者,只是觀察,但不參與，

then God may well exist, but we don't want to know about Him.

那麼,上帝可能存在,但我們不想了解他。

Many Jews and Christians now feel like this, I know.

許多猶太人和基督徒現在都有相同感受,我知道。

And I am among them.

因為我也是其中之一。

So we have a suffering God --

因此,我們有一個飽受折磨的神 。

a God who is intimately connected with this world and with every living soul.

緊密連接這個世界,慈眼視眾生,關念每個人的靈魂。

I very much relate to this idea of God.

我很贊同這個關於上帝的想法 。

But it isn't enough. I need to ask some more questions,

但這還不夠。我需要探討更多的問題，

and I hope they are questions that you will want to ask, as well,

我希望這些問題您也想知道,

some of you.

至少在坐的一些人想知道。

Over the last few weeks I have been struck by the number of times

過去的幾禮拜裡，我已經好幾次在

that words in our worship have felt a bit inappropriate, a bit dodgy.

我們的崇拜儀式中感受到有點不適當,和有點騙人的感覺。

We have a pram service on Tuesday mornings for mums and their pre-school children.

每個星期二早晨我們為媽媽和他們的學前兒童舉行一個親子教室。

And last week we sang with the children one of their favorite songs,

上週我們與孩子們唱一首他們都喜愛的歌曲,

"The Wise Man Built His House Upon the Rock."

〈聰明的人把房子建在磐石上〉。

Perhaps some of you know it. Some of the words go like this:

也許在坐的有些人知道這首歌.有些歌詞是這樣的：

"The foolish man built his house upon the sand /

「 愚蠢的人把房子建在沙上/

And the floods came up / And the house on the sand went crash."

海水來了/沙灘上的房子崩潰了。」

Then in the same week, at a funeral,

然後在同一周,在一個葬禮上，

we sang the familiar hymn "We Plow the Fields and Scatter,"

我們唱起了熟悉的讚美詩〈我們犁田和播種〉,

a very English hymn.

典型英國的讚美詩歌。

In the second verse comes the line, "The wind and waves obey Him."

在第二章句有一行是:「 風和海都必須服從祂」。

Do they? I don't feel we can sing that song again in church,

真的嗎？海嘯發生後,我不覺得我們能在教堂

after what's happened.

再唱這首歌 。

So the first big question is about control.

因此，第一個問題是關於統制駕馭。

Does God have a plan for each of us? Is God in control?

上帝決定每個人的命運嗎?上帝在獨攬管制世人嗎?

Does God order each moment? Does the wind and the waves obey Him?

每件事件的發生都是上帝的旨意嗎?上帝可以呼風喚雨?

From time to time,

一次又一次,

one hears Christians telling the story of how God organized things for them,

我們聽到基督徒強調上帝是如何為他們安排人生,

so that everything worked out all right --

所以一切均有完美結局 。

some difficulty overcome, some illness cured, some trouble averted,

克服一些難解的困難,治好有些醫師束手無策的疾病，避免有些麻煩，

a parking space found at a crucial time.

甚至在一個關鍵時刻找到一個停車位。

I can remember someone saying this to me,

我記得有人對我說這些奇蹟時,

with her eyes shining with enthusiasm at this wonderful confirmation of her faith

她的眼睛閃閃發光,熱情的見證對上帝的信心

and the goodness of God.

和上帝的真善美 。

But if God can or will do these things --

但是,如果上帝能夠或會做這些事情

intervene to change the flow of events --

--介入改變事件發生的結果--

then surely he could have stopped the tsunami.

那麼他一定能夠阻止海嘯。

Do we have a local God who can do little things like parking spaces,

我們是否有一個地區性的上帝，可以做一些小事:像是找車位，

but not big things like 500 mile-per-hour waves?

但卻不去阻止每小時500英里的海浪？

That's just not acceptable to intelligent Christians,

這是有智慧的基督徒不能接受的，

and we must acknowledge it.

我們必須承認這一點。

Either God is responsible for the tsunami,

上帝要不是必須為此災難負責(創造海嘯),

or God is not in control.

就是根本不法控制海嘯。

After the tragedy, survival stories began to emerge.

悲劇發生後，許多倖存者的故事開始流傳。

You probably heard some of them:

你可能聽說過一些。

the man who surfed the wave,

一名男子隨浪潮衝浪竟存活。

the teenage girl who recognized the danger

十幾歲的女孩瞭解到海嘯危險,

because she had just been learning about tsunamis at school.

因為她剛在校學習過。

Then there was the congregation who had left their usual church building on the shore

然後有一群教徒當天離開了他們在一貫使用的岸邊教堂

to hold a service in the hills.

改在山上禮拜。

The preacher delivered an extra long sermon,

那天牧師花在講道時間異常的長。

so that they were still out of harm's way when the wave struck.

所以,他們當海嘯襲擊時他們沒被傷害。

Afterwards someone said that God must have been looking after them.

後來有人說,上帝一定在照顧保護他們。

So the next question is about partiality.

因此,接下來的問題是關於偏袒。

Can we earn God's favor by worshipping Him or believing in Him?

是不是必須要相信他,崇拜他才能贏得上帝的青睞呢？

Does God demand loyalty, like any medieval tyrant?

是不是上帝要求忠誠像中世紀暴君一樣？

A God who looks after His own, so that Christians are OK,

上帝只照顧自己的子民.所以,基督徒可以平安,

while everyone else perishes?

而其他人就任其滅亡?

A cosmic us and them, and a God who is guilty of the worst kind of favoritism?

在同一個宇宙,有我,有您,和一個有最惡劣的偏袒罪行的上帝?

That would be appalling,

這將是駭人聽聞的,

and that would be the point at which I would hand in my membership.

如果這樣子,我將放棄我的會員資格。

Such a God would be morally inferior to the highest ideals of humanity.

這樣的上帝在道德上不如人類中的聖人。(具人性最高理念)

So who is God, if not the great puppet-master or the tribal protector?

那麼，誰是上帝，如果他不是木偶戲大師或部落的保護者？

Perhaps God allows or permits terrible things to happen,

也許上帝允許可怕事情發生，

so that heroism and compassion can be shown.

讓英雄主義和同情心可以被激發。

Perhaps God is testing us: testing our charity, or our faith.

也許上帝是考驗我們:考驗我們的慈善,或者我們的信仰。

Perhaps there is a great, cosmic plan that allows for horrible suffering

也許另一個偉大的宇宙計劃將實現,所以會有可怕的天災人禍,

so that everything will work out OK in the end.

因為要從新洗牌,為美麗遠景而受苦。

Perhaps, but these ideas are all just variations on God controlling everything,

或許吧! 但這些想法都只是對上帝是主宰者的不同聯想。

the supreme commander toying with expendable units in a great campaign.

最高統帥在巨大的活動中,玩弄著可被消耗的單位。

We are still left with a God who can do the tsunami and allow Auschwitz.

我們的上帝還是那個製造海嘯,同意奥斯威辛死亡集中營的神 。

In his great novel, "The Brothers Karamazov," Dostoevsky gives these words to Ivan,

費奧多爾·陀思妥耶夫斯基(Dostoevsky)在他偉大小說〈卡拉馬佐夫兄弟〉中寫了這些話給艾本(Ivan),

addressed to his naive and devout younger brother, Alyosha:

這些話是告訴他天真和虔誠的弟弟，阿憂沙(Alyosha):

"If the sufferings of children go to make up the sum of sufferings

「 如果須要累積總合無數次孩子們的痛苦

which is necessary for the purchase of truth,

才有足夠的能力購買真理,

then I say beforehand that the entire truth is not worth such a price.

那我想先說,這個真理不值得購買。

We cannot afford to pay so much for admission.

我們付不起這麼多的入場費。

It is not God that I do not accept.

不是說我不接受上帝(而是這過程,我不能承受)，

I merely, most respectfully, return Him the ticket."

我只好用最虔誠的態度,把進入(天國)的門票還給上帝。」

Or perhaps God set the whole universe going at the beginning

或者當上帝創造整個宇宙時,

and then relinquished control forever,

就決定永遠放棄控制,

so that natural processes could occur, and evolution run its course.

所以該在自然過程會發生的就發生,而演化過程也扮演其該有的角色 。

This seems more acceptable,

這解釋似乎比較容易接受，

but it still leaves God with the ultimate moral responsibility.

但上帝還是背負終極的道德責任 。

Is God a cold, unfeeling spectator?

難道上帝是冷漠無情的觀眾？

Or a powerless lover, watching with infinite compassion

或是一個無能為力的愛人,眼睜睜看著無數次悲哀

things God is unable to control or change?

卻無法控制或改變?

Is God intimately involved in our suffering,

還是上帝密切參與我們的痛苦，

so that He feels it in His own being?

所以他也深切的體會那份苦?

If we believe something like this, we must let go of the puppet-master completely,

如果我們相信這樣的推理,我們必須完全放棄木偶大師的上帝形象，

take our leave of the almighty controller, abandon traditional models.

拋開全能控制者上帝的理念,拋棄傳統的模式。

We must think again about God.

我們一定要從新將上帝定位。

Maybe God doesn't do things at all.

也許上帝根本什麼也沒做(沒有創造所有的災難)。

Maybe God isn't an agent like all of us are agents.

也許人類才是所有災禍的媒介,不是上帝。

Early religious thought conceived God as a sort of superhuman person,

早期的宗教思想,設想上帝是超人。

doing things all over the place.

在每個不同角落,做每件事。

Beating up the Egyptians, drowning them in the Red Sea, wasting cities, getting angry.

毆打埃及人,把他們淹死在紅海裡,摧毀整個城市,(因為埃及人惹)上帝生氣。

The people knew their God by His mighty acts.

人們瞭解的上帝是透過祂的偉大神跡。

But what if God doesn't act? What if God doesn't do things at all?

但是,如果上帝沒有採取任何行動? 如果上帝根本沒有做任何事？

What if God is in things?

又如果上帝是與任何事件共同存在？

The loving soul of the universe.

是存在宇宙間充滿愛心的靈魂。

An in-dwelling compassionate presence, underpinning and sustaining all things.

是支撐和維持一切事物的一種內在的仁慈善心。

What if God is in things?

可不可能上帝是與任何事件共同存在呢？

In the infinitely complex network of relationships and connections that make up life.

在無限複雜的關係網和連接中形成生命。

In the natural cycle of life and death,

所以必須遵循自然法則--有生有死,

the creation and destruction that must happen continuously.

創造和破壞,一定會不斷發生。

In the process of evolution.

上帝是在自然的進化的過程中。

In the incredible intricacy and magnificence of the natural world.

是在令人難以置信的錯綜複雜中和壯麗的自然世界中。

In the collective unconscious, the soul of the human race.

在潛意識中,與人類的靈魂同在。

In you, in me, mind and body and spirit.

與您,與我,與我們的記憶,我們的身體和靈魂同在。

In the tsunami, in the victims. In the depth of things.

在海嘯中,與受難者同在。滲入事件的深處.

In presence and in absence. In simplicity and complexity.

與存在和失落同在,在簡單中也在繁雜中 。

In change and development and growth.

在變異,發展和茁壯中存在 。

How does this in-ness, this innerness, this interiority of God work?

如何解釋上帝這種「同在性 」,「內心性 」,「內在性 」的特質呢？

It's hard to conceive, and begs more questions.

這想法很難被接受,因此引出更多的疑問。

Is God just another name for the universe,

是不是上帝只是宇宙的另一個名稱，

with no independent existence at all?

根本沒有獨立存在過呢？

I don't know.

我不知道。

To what extent can we ascribe personality to God?

在何種程度上,我們可以賦予上帝多少人格特質？

I don't know.

我不知道。

In the end, we have to say, "I don't know."

最終,我們不得不說:「我不知道。」

If we knew, God would not be God.

如果我們知道,上帝就不是上帝了。

To have faith in this God

對上帝的信心

would be more like trusting an essential benevolence in the universe,

應該跟相信世界裡有一個根本的善念一樣,

and less like believing a system of doctrinal statements.

而不是只是相信刻板理論教條的上帝。

Isn't it ironic that Christians who claim to believe

對基督徒的我們而言這不是很諷刺嗎？

in an infinite, unknowable being

我們宣稱我們相信無限和不可知,

then tie God down in closed systems and rigid doctrines?

然而卻用封閉系統和僵化教條來困鎖我們的上帝。

How could one practice such a faith?

那麼如何能實踐這種對上帝的信念呢？

By seeking the God within. By cultivating my own inwardness.

在內心深處尋求上帝,通過培養自己的內在。

In silence, in meditation, in my inner space, in the me that remains

在寂靜,在打坐中,在我的內在世界中,在我們安心自在裡

when I gently put aside my passing emotions and ideas and preoccupations.

拋棄我們的情緒,想法和偏見時所萃取出純真的我們中,

In awareness of the inner conversation.

在我們自我檢視的過程中 。

And how would we live such a faith? How would I live such a faith?

那麼我們如何能活出這樣的信念呢？我又將如何能在生活中實踐這樣的信仰呢？

By seeking intimate connection with your inwardness.

經由尋求與您的內在密切聯繫 。

The kind of relationships when deep speaks to deep.

是那種乳水交融的關係.

If God is in all people, then there is a meeting place

如果上帝存在所有的人中,那麼就有一個地方，

where my relationship with you becomes a three-way encounter.

在那兒我跟您的關係是三方面的接觸,是相通的 。

There is an Indian greeting, which I'm sure some of you know:

印度有句問候語,我敢肯定，你們有些人會知道：

"Namaste," accompanied by a respectful bow,

〈Namaste〉（〈合十禮〉）伴隨著恭敬的一鞠躬，

which, roughly translated means,

大致翻譯的意思是

"That which is of God in me greets that which of God is in you."

「 我心中的神跟您心中的神打招呼」 。

Namaste.

〈合十禮〉。

And how would one deepen such a faith?

那我們如何加強這種信念呢？

By seeking the inwardness which is in all things.

通過追索所有的事物的內在層面。

In music and poetry, in the natural world of beauty

在悠揚樂章中在動人詩歌中,在欣賞美麗的自然世界中

and in the small ordinary things of life,

和處理日常生活中的瑣碎小事中。

there is a deep, indwelling presence that makes them extraordinary.

因為這些事務中都包含一個深奧的道德,所以不平凡.(一花一世界）

It needs a profound attentiveness and a patient waiting,

是須要深刻徹底的關注和耐心才能完成 。

a contemplative attitude and a generosity and openness

是須要深思熟慮的態度和慷慨開放的胸襟

to those whose experience is different from my own.

來接受與我們不同的背景的他人 。

When I stood up to speak to my people about God and the tsunami,

當我站在我的教友前,對他們講有關上帝和海嘯時，

I had no answers to offer them.

我沒有任何的答案可給他們。

No neat packages of faith, with Bible references to prove them.

聖經中沒有完善的標準答案,我無法找到可參考証明的任何有關資料 。

Only doubts and questioning and uncertainty.

所以只剩下懷疑,疑問和不確定 。

I had some suggestions to make --

我想提出一些建議,使

possible new ways of thinking about God.

--是否能用新的思維方式來將上帝定位。

Ways that might allow us to go on, down a new and uncharted road.

一條新的和未經探測的思考方式讓我們可能繼續下去 。

But in the end, the only thing I could say for sure was, "I don't know,"

最後，我唯一能肯定地的是:「我不知道」,

and that just might be the most profoundly religious statement of all.

而這或許也是我最深切的宗教聲明。

Thank you.

謝謝。