顯示具有 生態神學 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章
顯示具有 生態神學 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章

2016年12月11日 星期日

創造:存在、秩序與意義之根源/ 柯志明教授

創 造
存在、秩序與意義之根源

柯志明
20161115 講於靜宜大學生態人文學系「生態人文學家咖啡館」

        1.創造(creation)不是一個「科學」概念,基督信仰的創造更不是,雖然科學家也常常喜言自然的或人的「創造」。
        基督信仰的創造教義與神學不但不被現代科學所接受或假定,更常是科學家鉅烈批判甚至攻擊的對象。然而,現代科學史上最為偉大的科學家們幾乎都是敬虔的基督徒,就是今日也仍有許許多多敬虔而傑出的基督徒科學家。這些科學家不但相信上帝創造宇宙,更根據他們的科學研究成果極力為此辯護。
        究竟基督信仰的「創造」是否與科學衝突?對科學有沒有意義?若有,意味著什麼?若再縮小範圍,「創造」對生態學或生態人文(ecological humanities)又有何意義?對人的生命有何意義?以下我將試著簡要回應這些問題。我的觀點是,就理論而言,基督信仰的創造教義是科學與生態人文最合理可信的前設(presupposition)。

        2.無人可否認,創造是基督信仰的核心教義。聖經的第一卷書就是《創世記》,第一句話就是「起初,上帝創造天地」(創1:1)。《創世記》1:1-2:3完整地敘述了上帝有關天地萬有的創造(2:4-25是對1:26-27的細節補充),但有關創造更為深刻而豐富的內涵直到了新約聖經時才清楚呈現(約1:1-3; 羅8:19-22; 西1:15-20; 來1:1-3)。
        很明顯地,有關上帝創造天地萬有的敘述只佔聖經非常微小的篇幅,而且敘述內容非常簡略。然而,如果沒有上帝的創造,聖經的其他敘事根本不可能展開,也難以理解,因為整本聖經都在見證這位創造者上帝的創造、護理、拯救的作為。因此,創造教義是核心而不可忽視與取代的。可以毫不誇張地說,誰錯解創造教義,誰就不可能正確理解基督信仰。
        不但如此,我們認為創造教義不只具「基督信仰的」意義,更有哲學與科學意義,雖然哲學家與科學家們常因之爭論。對我而言,至少可以說,基督信仰的創造教義提供了哲學與科學之所以可能且有意義的條件。何以如此?我們先概略地理解基督信仰的創造教義。

2015年10月12日 星期一

敬虔守護生態:並讀《受造物頌》與《願祢受讚頌》/ 柯志明教授

敬虔守護生態
並讀《受造物頌》與《願祢受讚頌》

Piety Protects the Earth
Read Laudato Si through Canticles of the Creatures

Immanuel Chih-Ming Ke, Associate Professor of Philosophy
Department of Ecological Humanities, Providence University
3 Oct. 2015. “A Symposium on Pope Francis’ Encyclical Letter Laudato Si,” Providence University


Abstract
    Pope Francis officially published Laudato Si on 18 June 2015. It calls all people of the world to care for the Earth, “our common home,” through introspection, discussions, and taking actions. In this encyclical letter Pope Francis expects to achieve three goals: First, it assists us to recognize the grave challenges and difficulties in the present environmental crisis and the urgent need for solutions; second, it intends to go the root of the ecological degradation, and it analyzes the deepest cause; third, it provides an enlightening and guiding principles for human development based on the Christian tradition and experience of spirituality.
     Pope Francis takes its title “Laudato Si” from the reiterated eight times praising words “Laudato si, mi signore” in Laudes Creaturarum (or Cantico di frate Sole) by Saint Francis of Assisi. It is obviously evident that Pope Francis intends to continue the ecological spirit of Saint Francis who praises the Creator for the creation. Therefore, it could be said that Laudato Si is the modern interpretation and extension of the profound meaning that Canticles of Creatures implies. Accordingly, I think only through the real understanding of Canticle of Creatures and the Christian faith that it is rooted can one read and understand Laudato Si correctly and adequately, and thus can one grasp the insights and profound meanings of eco-Nature, which can be disclosed only by Christianity.
    It is just like what Laudato Si points out: creation comes about as the result of the God’s free decision and thus all things embody the God’s sublime, profundity, holiness, good will, above all the nature of His love. It is exactly as Pope says, “Creation is of the order of love. God’s love is the fundamental moving force in all created things”; moreover, in terms of the most profound meaning, Pope points out that the whole creation embodies the profound Trinity of God, and even each creature bears in itself “a specially Trinitarian structure.”
    Consequently, this is the universe that can be understood only by person who has “Imago Dei.” What Pope cares about in this encyclical letter is the created world like this, and that is also the created world that Saint Francis of Assisi calls other creatures “bothers and sisters,” but not the no transcendental sense “Nature” called by modern atheists, materialists, and naturalists. Accordingly, humans are the created beings who posses a unique nature and a peculiar ecological status, so that they are responsible for caring the environment of the Earth. Therefore, Pope clearly indicates, “The human environment and the natural environment deteriorate together; we cannot adequately combat environmental degradation unless we attend to causes related to human and social degradation.” Thus, it is as Pope John Paul II states, “The ecological crisis is a moral crisis,” so that what modern people need is an “ecological conversion” that is a religious conversion related to ecological environment.
    So far as that is concerned, humans cannot solve the problems of man-made ecological crisis unless they have a right faith. This is why the last chapter of encyclical letter mentions ecological education and spiritual conversion. Obviously, Pope expects that people could cultivate “pietas” toward God, just like the life of Saint Francis of Assisi manifested; people cannot care for all creatures as Saint Francis does unless they have the same piety. Therefore, I think although Pope does not explicitly indicate, his encyclical letter tells us this implicitly: Only Christianity can clearly and completely penetrates and reveals the fundamental degradation of humans and the world. In consequence, only Christianity can penetrate into the roots of the ecological crisis and reveal the solutions; besides, only the person who is like Saint Francis of Assisi, who completely believe in and submits to our Lord Jesus Christ and who is humble and pious, can regardless and selflessly protect “our common home” —the Earth.


全文:

2015年4月10日 星期五

基督徒的生態職責/ 柯志明教授

基督徒的生態職責

柯志明 
20150410大肚山研經室


*The Care of Creation: Focusing Concern and Action 中文版 《關顧受造世界:基督教對環境的關懷與行動》(新北市:聖經資源中心,2015)序

        自十九世紀以來,基督信仰在生態思想史上幾乎一直無法擺脫被污名化與抹黑的命運,而且愈來愈強烈,最後在叛逆的1960年代達到高峰。1967年美國中世紀史學家Lynn White Jr.定調:基督信仰是今日生態危機的歷史根源(其實這論調早在1890年代就被Edward Payson Evans大力倡說過了)。此後,基督信仰反生態且造成生態危機已然成了今日生態學界的基調,以致想護衛生態環境的人似乎都有反基督教傾向。1977年美國堪薩斯大學(University of Kansas)著名的環境史教授Donald Worster出版了他的名著《自然的經濟:生態觀念史》(Nature's Economy: A History of Ecological Ideas, 1977),此書就是以貶抑基督信仰而高揚當代生態意識之基調寫成的,閱讀本書除了可得十八世紀以來生態思想發展的一些相關知識外,更對基督信仰「本質上」反生態與輕視自然留下深刻印象。因此,Lynn White的那篇小文章影響可謂不小,讓所有反基督信仰者甚或反西方文明者找到了今日生態災難的所謂「元凶」,並且為其罪行作了一個堂而皇之的「學術定讞」。
  很快地,這個「是基督教以及由之產生的西方文明造成當代生態災難」的論調在1980年代就由留美歸國學者在臺灣學界散播,「學術地」武裝了臺灣某些山林保育前鋒,使此輩與美國激進生態分子一樣,好以激切口氣批判基督信仰、西方科技文明與資本主義文化,為自然山林叫屈。不幸的是,連一些基督徒學者也在不同程度上應聲付和,這當然不表示White是對的,但卻表示許多所謂的基督徒學者與White一樣對基督信仰一知半解,對聖經望文生義,強為之解,實在可悲。
  但White的文章並非一無是處,至少他說人對待自然的態度反映著人有關自然的信仰,又認為只有宗教信仰而不是更多的科學技術才能解決當今的生態危機,並且他又認為還是要回到基督信仰本身才能從根解決這個危機。只可惜他要回歸的聖方濟被他認為是基督信仰「最激進」的「異端」,這暗示正統基督信仰還不是她自己造成之生態危機的解藥。我完全同意,只有真理的信仰才能解除今日的生態危機,我更完全相信只有建基於聖經的正統基督信仰是真理的信仰。

2012年9月13日 星期四

St. Francis’ Love of Nature: The Secret which Cannot be Understood by Modern Atheistic Ecoists/ 柯志明教授

St. Francis’ Love of Nature
The Secret which Cannot be Understood by 
Modern Atheistic Ecoists


Dr. Immanuel Chih-Ming Ke
柯志明

St. Francis of Assisi (1182-1226) was a man of mystery. He was a fanatical follower of Jesus Christ, so he couldn’t be easily understood by modern ecoists. Perhaps, modern people can slightly conjecture what the spiritual intentions of St. Francis might have been only by humming the song, “The prayer of St. Francis”[1]. It was written by later generations, but this is quite insufficient to achieve an understanding of Francis’ fanatical enthusiasm, which is beyond our simple understanding, of his will to follow Jesus Christ. Many modern ecoists choose to like him and then to praise him highly. They also choose to separate him from the Christian faith (or orthodox Christian faith); on the one hand, he is exalted to be the patron saint of the environment and of animals, and on the other hand, through him, Christian faith may be criticized because it turns out to be an extremely anthropocentric religion that tramples on nature. However, and unfortunately, Francis would inversely criticize these modern ecoists for their misunderstanding of him, and for their whole misunderstanding of the tenets of Christian faith; most likely, he would declare that they are actually extreme anthropocentricists on their own account and that the root of ecological crisis is hidden in these atheistic modernists’ way of thought and deed.




[1] See William Ng ofm’s (伍維烈) “The Peace Prayer which is not Attributed to ‘Francis’” 〈不是「方濟各的」和平禱詞〉See: http://www.ofm.org.hk/200-Sprituality/ 222- Articles/ 2221Franciscan _Spirituality/wn-peaceprayer.htm



2011年12月26日 星期一

聖方濟的自然之愛:現代無神論生態主義者不能理解的秘密/柯志明教授

 聖方濟的自然之愛:
現代無神論生態主義者不能理解的秘密

柯志明


*案:本文發表於《獨者:臺灣基督徒思想論刊》,第22期,2011年秋冬,
台北市:台灣基督徒學會,頁33-54。

2011年9月17日 星期六

十字架與自然:十字架的生態神學意涵/柯志明教授

 十字架與自然:
十字架的生態神學意涵


柯志明


*案:本文發表於《獨者:臺灣基督徒思想論刊》,第21期,2011年春夏,
臺北市:臺灣基督徒學會,頁17-40。


2010年12月26日 星期日

這是天父世界:回應Rolston教授的演講「上帝的護理與生態中心主義」/ 柯志明教授

這是天父世界:
回應Rolston教授的演講「上帝的護理與生態中心主義」

柯志明

*案:本文發表於《獨者:臺灣基督徒思想論刊》,第16期,2008年秋冬,
臺北市:臺灣基督徒學會,頁61-74。

Ecology是家學:以愛為核心的生態學之精神科學意涵──從自然到上帝/ 柯志明教授

Ecology是家學:
以愛為核心的生態學之精神科學意涵──從自然到上帝

柯志明


*案:本文發表於《獨者:臺灣基督徒思想論刊》,第16期,2008年秋冬,
臺北市:臺灣基督徒學會,頁263-302。