2008年11月22日星期六

五項錯誤

今期公教報,另有一篇關傑棠神父的文章,名為〈一起期待新文明〉,刊登在「漁夫集」的專欄。

當中他這樣寫道:
教會生活有個我們常犯的毛病,便是把某歷史階段的模式絕對化,更深層的意義是相信這時期的神學是唯一真理。結果大家的反省能力退化,淪為教條主義信徒,教務因循苟且。今天最明顯的例子是縱然全人類都認為民主制度比獨裁好,多溝通渠道比一言堂健康,天主教仍是我行我素。又或者由上世紀中葉引伸到今天的神職人員涉及性醜聞案件,教會領導人還是一貫針對個別罪犯而加以譴責,很少人有勇氣挑戰這個源自十一世紀,基本涉及經濟因素而修訂的司鐸獨身制度。其實司鐸聖召和獨身聖召之間的「必然性」是有繼續討論的空間,可惜教會早就把這規條絕對化,提出異議的人便算大逆不道......有人批評神學是服務掌權者,驟聽之下有點偏激,但箇中不無道理。[...]

似乎關神父有以下想法:
  1. 天主教會屬「我行我素」的、亟待改善的「獨裁」社團和「一言堂」,而更好應採納「民主制度」。
  2. 神職人員涉及性醜聞案件,起源於司鐸獨身制度。
  3. 教會領袖面對性醜聞問題,而不檢討甚至「挑戰」司鐸獨身制度,乃缺乏勇氣的表現。
  4. 司鐸獨身制度源自十一世紀,且基本上是涉及經濟因素而修訂。
  5. 教會將司鐸獨身的規條絕對化,且將提出異議的人算為大逆不道。

小弟認為,將這五條想法,視作「錯誤」,一點也不過分。

2 則留言:

Fr.Dominic 說...

I could not agree more with you, Edward!

匿名 說...

Previously some of my classmates(includ a Catholic) have asked me whether those scandals are a result of the celibacy of priesthood. At that time, I promptly answered NO.

I always compare "celibacy" of the holy orders and "monogamy" of the holy matrimony. They are different but similar in the sense that one remains faithfully exclusive to other people; those priests who committed these offenses to others are in no way similar to an extramarital relationship committed by a married person. It follows that if one thinks of these scandals as a result of "celibacy" in The Holy Orders, one is close to opposing the The Holy Matrimony by imputing the cause of extramarital relationship as a result of its monogamous nature.

Fr. Kwan's idea of challenging the tradition of priesthood is not far from tearing down the essence of marriage.

Joseph Tang