据说阿奎那五岁时曾向他的教理老师提出了所有问题中的问题：「老师，神是什么？」 At five years old, Thomas Aquinas is said to have posed to his catechism teacher the question of all questions, but Master, what is God?
信经给了我们一个简洁但无穷尽的答案。 The Creed gives us a succinct but inexhaustible answer.
独一的神与宇宙中任何其他存在不同，是完全实在的和无条件的。 The one God, unlike any other being in the cosmos, is fully actual and unconditioned.
此外，神是圣父。 Furthermore, God is Father.
他生成、珍爱并指引万物。 He generates, cherishes, and directs all things.
神是创造者，是所有偶然实在的非偶然源头。 And God is creator, the non-contingent source of all contingent reality.
我们已经看了三个词：我、相信和神。 So we've looked at three words, I, believe, and God.
但我们现在忽略了一个非常重要的第四个词。 But we've overlooked now a very important fourth word.
所以想想「我信独一神」这句话，我现在想关注「独一」这个词。 So think, credo in unum Deum, I believe in one God, and I want to focus now on that word one.
你知道，神的独一性是圣经信仰的基础。 The unity of God, as you know, is basic to biblical belief.
想想申命记第六章中伟大的示玛祷告。 Think of the great Shema prayer in Deuteronomy chapter six.
「以色列啊，你要听，耶和华我们神是独一的主。」 Hear, O Israel, the Lord your God is Lord alone.
神的独一性在整个圣经传统中得到肯定。 The unity of God affirmed up and down the biblical tradition.
约瑟夫·拉辛格，即教宗本笃十六世，对示玛和信 经中「我信独一神」这句话做出了精彩的评论。 Joseph Ratzinger, Pope Benedict, made a wonderful comment about the Shema and about the credo, the credo in unum Deum, in one God.
他说这是一个颠覆性的宣告。 He said it's a subversive claim.
为什么呢？ How come?
因为它不允许我们生命中有任何其他终极性的宣称者。 Because it's disallowing any other claimant to ultimacy in our lives.
如果我说我相信独一神，我就是在暗示，国家不是神，总统 不是神，文化不是神，没有其他事物对我具有终极重要性。 If I say I believe in one God, I'm implying, well, the state is not God, the president is not God, the culture is not God, nothing else is of ultimate importance to me.
唯独神。 God alone.
我信独一神，神的独一性。 Credo in unum Deum, the unity of God.
现在，神的独一性也可以用更哲学的方式来展示，所以请记住我之前发展的偶然性论证。 Now the unity of God can also be shown in a more philosophical way, so keep in mind that argument from contingency that I developed.
其结论是，有一种实在通过其自身本性的力量而存在。 The conclusion of which is, some reality which exists through the very power of his own nature.
这位存在者并非从其他事物或外在原因获得其存在，而是通过自身本性的力量而存在。 The one who does not derive his being from something else, from some extrinsic cause, but exists through the power of his own nature.
这必然意味着这个实在没有潜能，不依赖于自身之外的 任何事物，而是存在于阿奎那所称的纯粹现实态中。 This must mean that this reality has no potentiality, is not dependent upon anything outside of itself, but rather exists in the state of what Thomas Aquinas called actus purus, pure act.
我一直很喜欢这种对神的描述。 I've always loved that description of God.
拉丁语中的「现实态」实际上是从希腊语「能量」翻译而来。 Actus in Latin really translates energeia from the Greek, energy.
神是纯粹的能量，纯粹的现实态。 God is pure energy, pure actuality.
神以这个词最完全的可能意义存在。 God exists in the fullest possible sense of that term.
这就是纯粹现实态的含义。 That's what actus purus means.
你现在看到这与神的独一性有何关联了吧。 Well you see how that's related now to the unity of God.
不可能有两个这样的存在。 There can't be two of these things running around.
不可能有两个纯粹现实态。 There can't be two actus purus.
你明白为什么吗？ Do you see why?
当我说一个、两个，这个不是那个时，我就暗示着每一个相对于另一个都是潜在的。 The minute I say one, two, this is not that, I'm implying each is potential vis-a-vis the other.
A不是B，B不是A。只要有区别，就存在潜在性。 A is not B. B is not A. Whenever you have differentiation, you've got potentiality.
但神是纯粹现实态，纯粹的行动。 But God is actus purus, pure act.
他里面没有潜在性，因此不可能有多个神。 There's no potentiality in him, hence there can't be multiple gods.
我信独一神。 Credo in unum Deum, I believe in one God.
这是圣经的真理，也是哲学上连贯一致的真理。 That's a biblical truth and it's philosophically coherent truth.
从神的独一性中，我认为可能衍生出神最具特征的属性。 And from the unity of God there follows the attribute that I think is maybe most characteristic of God.
这就是阿奎那所称的神的单纯性。 What Thomas Aquinas calls the simplicity of God.
神是最单纯的实在。 God is the simplest reality of all.
请注意，这并不意味着神是原始的，与复杂的存在相对。 Now mind you, that does not mean that God is primitive as opposed to complex beings.
实际上恰恰相反。 Really just the opposite.
这并不意味着神处于某种较低的发展水平。 It doesn't mean God's at some lower level of development.
我在这里指的是一种非常独特的东西，即神就是存在。 What I mean here is something very distinctive, namely that God is.
他不是以特定方式存在，不是按照特定形式存在，也不是根据特定的本质原则而被接受的。 He's not in a particular way, not according to a particular form, not received according to a particular essential principle.
神就是存在。 God is.
现在我来具体解释一下。 Now I'll make it a little more concrete.
我站在你们面前，我存在，但我不是纯粹的存在行为。 So here I am before you, I exist, but I'm not the sheer act of existence.
我是一个人，对吧？ I'm a human being, right?
我确实是一个存在，但我以一种非常明确、有限、受限的方式存在。 I'm a being, yes indeed, but I exist in a very definitive, definite, restricted way.
我此时此地以这种身体形式存在。 I'm here and now in this bodily form.
我是这个而不是那个。 I'm this rather than that.
我不是任何其他种类的存在。 I'm not any other kind of being.
我的存在是极其受限的。 My being is extremely restricted.
我现在对着说话的摄像机确实是一个存在，但它不是纯粹的存在行为。 The camera into which I'm speaking right now is a being indeed that exists, but it's not the sheer act of existence.
它是一种非常明确的技术类型的存在。 It's a being of a very definite technological type.
我现在所在的教堂存在，它是一个存在，但不是存在本身的纯粹行为。 The church I'm in right now exists, it's a being, but not the sheer act of being itself.
它是一座教堂。 It's a church.
它是按照特定类型存在的。 It's a being according to a particular type.
神是什么样的存在？ What kind of being is God?
这是一个不恰当的问题。 It's a bad question.
这是一个错误的问题。 It's the wrong question.
圣母大学的神学家大卫·伯雷尔曾著名地说过，神就是存在，就是存在。 David Burrell, the theologian from the University of Notre Dame famously said, to be God is to be, to be.
作为我就是作为人。 To be me is to be human.
作为那个摄像机就是作为一种技术类型的存在。 To be that camera is to be a being of a technological type.
作为神就是存在，就是存在。 To be God is to be, to be.
这是阿奎那用他的专业语言表达的方式。 Here's the way Thomas Aquinas puts it in his technical language.
在神里面，本质和存在是一致的。 In God, essence and existence coincide.
我知道这听起来很抽象，但这正是我一直在谈论的。 I know that sounds very abstract, but it's really what I've been talking about.
所以在我身上，存在（我是）和本质（我是什么）之间有真实的区别。 So in me, there's a real distinction between existence, that I am, and essence, what I am.
把我的存在行为想象成倾注到我是什么这个容器中。 Think of my act of existing as poured into the receptacle of what I am.
我是一个人。 I'm a human being.
在我身上，本质和存在是不同的。 In me, essence and existence are different.
在这个摄像机中，本质和存在是不同的。 In this camera, essence and existence are different.
它按照特定形式存在。 It exists according to a particular form.
事实上，在任何受造物中，本质和存在都是不同的，无论是木 星、大天使、这个摄像机还是我，我们都是特定类型的存在。 Essence and existence, in fact, are different in any creature, whether it's the planet Jupiter, an archangel, this camera, or me, we are beings of a particular type.
但作为神就是存在，就是存在。 But to be God is to be, to be.
在他里面，本质和存在是一致的。 In him, essence and existence coincide.
顺便说一下，我不知道你是否想到了这一点。 Now by the way, I wonder if this has come into your mind.
在出埃及记第三章中，当摩西问神他的名字时，他说：「当 我问这位对我说话的神的名字时，我该告诉百姓什么？」 In the third chapter of the book of Exodus, when Moses asked God his name, what shall I tell the people when I ask the name of this God who is speaking to me?
神说什么？ What does God say?
「我是自有永有的。」 I am who I am.
用专业的哲学语言来说，就是在我里面，本质和存在是一致的。 Put that in technical philosophical language, in me, essence and existence coincide.
用属灵的语言来说，就是别再问我这种愚蠢的问题了。 Put it in spiritual language, stop asking me such stupid questions.
明白我的意思吗？ See what I'm saying?
摩西在问，你是什么样的存在？ Moses is asking, well what kind of being are you?
你是哪一位神？ Which of the gods are you?
「我是自有永有的。」 I am who I am.
这就是神在他本体论的单纯性中的声音。 That's the voice of God in his ontological simplicity.
作为神就是存在，就是存在。 To be God is to be, to be.
现在大家注意，我知道这听起来可能非常抽象难懂。 Now notice something everybody, I know this can seem all very achingly abstract.
那位自有永有的，他在这个房间里吗？ The one who is, is he in this room?
是的，无处不在。 Yeah, everywhere.
旧版巴尔的摩教理问答问道：神在哪里？ The old Baltimore catechism asks, where is God?
答案是：无处不在。 Answer, everywhere.
为什么？ Why?
因为纯粹的存在行为本身就是世界上一切存在背后的支撑。 Because the sheer act of being itself is what stands behind the being of everything in the world.
阿奎那说，神以本质、临在和能力存在于万物之中。 God is in all things, Aquinas says, by essence, presence and power.
存在本身在这个房间里吗？ Is being itself in this room?
不，完全不是。 No, not at all.
因为这个房间只是充满了存在物。 Because this room is just filled with beings.
正如我所说，神不是这个房间里的一个存在物。 God as I said is not one of the beings in this room.
那位自有永有的，同时是完全他者（拉丁语：totalitare alitere，这是个优美的短语），又与我亲密如我自己。 The one who is, is simultaneously totalitare alitere, lovely Latin phrase for totally other, and as close to me as I am to myself.
这说得通吗？ Does that make sense?
要理解这一点，当然我必须加上引号，朝那个方 向做出姿态就是理解了神的单纯性的某些方面。 To get that, and of course get it, I have to put in quotes, to gesture in that direction is to understand something of the simplicity of God.
完全他者，却比我自己更亲近我。 Totalitare alitere, closer to me than I am to myself.
这就是为什么奥古斯丁如此优美地说，神是「superior summa maio, et intimior intimo maio」，意思 是神比我能想象的任何事物都更高，同时又比我最亲密的部分更亲近我。 That's why St. Augustine said it so beautifully, God is superior summa maio, et intimior intimo maio, that means higher than anything I can imagine, and closer than the most intimate part of me, at the same time.
这就是谈论神的单纯性的含义。 That's what it means to speak of God's simplicity.
主教，你说神不是受造物，但在圣经中他似乎像受造物一样行动。 Bishop, you say God is not a creature, but it seems he acts like a creature in the Bible.
我们如何理解这种差异？ How do we understand this discrepancy?
当然，圣经使用不同类型的语言。 Well of course the Bible uses different types of language.
有时它使用非常高深抽象的语言。 Sometimes it uses very high abstract language.
想想先知以赛亚书的后半部分。 Think of things in the second part of the prophet Isaiah.
其他时候它使用更多形象化和诗意的语言。 Other times it uses much more imagistic and poetic language.
圣爱任纽很久以前就看到了这一点，就像我们在教育幼童时使用 某些类型的语言，随着他长大我们会使用更复杂的语言，当他成 年后，我们会使用完全恰当的语言，适合我们讨论的对象。 St. Irenaeus saw this a long time ago, that just as we educate a young kid by using certain types of language when he's very young, then we make it a bit more sophisticated as he gets older, and then as he gets to be an adult, we'll use entirely appropriate language, appropriate to the object of our discussion.
同样的，把圣经看作神对以色列民族的持续教育。 Well in a similar way, think of the Bible as God's steady education of the people Israel.
但你有时会使用更孩子气的语言，图像化的语言，用非常拟人化的方式描述神吗？ But do you sometimes use more childlike language, pictorial language, where God is put in very anthropomorphic terms?
是的，当然。 Yeah, sure.
这是否意味着现在适合更成熟的问题层次？ Does that mean that that's appropriate now to a more adult level of question?
嗯，不是。 Well no.
你可以看到圣经本身从更形象化到更复杂的语言类型的一种演变。 And you see a kind of evolution within the Bible itself from a more pictorial to a more sophisticated type of language.
所以我只是要小心圣经所使用的语言类型和文体。 So I just be careful about the kind of language, the kind of genre the Bible is employing.
所以我现在从神的独一性讲到了神的单纯性，现在我想从神的单纯性推导出神的一些属性。 So I've gone now from God's unity to God's simplicity, and now from God's simplicity I want to derive a number of attributes of God.
我们在伟大的传统中谈论肯定之路和否定之路，对吧？ We speak in the great tradition of the via positiva and the via negativa, right?
肯定的方式和否定的方式。 The positive way and the negative way.
我所说的肯定之路是这样的。 By the positive way I mean this.
因为神的本质，我可以取世界上任何美好、善良 、真实和积极的事物，并说这也一定适用于神。 Because of who God is, I can take anything that's beautiful, good, true, and positive in the world and say that must also be true of God.
否定之路则是，我必须取世界上任何不完美的事物，一切带 有潜在性、局限性或不完美的东西，并说这些不属于神。 The via negativa, I must take anything that's imperfect in the world, everything marked by potentiality or limitation or imperfection and say that doesn't belong to God.
肯定之路，否定之路。 The via positiva, the via negativa.
让我们先看看肯定之路。 So look at the via positiva first.
例如，我可以说神是善的。 I can say for example that God is good.
所以我看周围的一切事物，我认为它们是善的。 So I look at all the things around me and I see them as good.
阿奎那认为，善意味着可欲的。 Good Thomas Aquinas argues means desirable.
什么是可欲的？ What's desirable?
是完美的，对吧？ Well the perfect, right?
无论我渴望什么，凡是善的都是完美的。 Whatever I'm desiring, whatever is good is something perfect.
神是完全实在的，纯粹现实态，因此必定是绝对完美的，因此也是绝对可欲的。 God who's fully actual, actus purus, therefore must be absolutely perfect, and therefore absolutely desirable.
神是至善的。 God is supremely good.
在肯定之路下我们还能说什么？ What else can we say under the via positiva?
如果神是纯粹现实态，神拥有一切可能的完美，那么神必定是位格性的，对吧？ Well if God is actus purus, God has all possible perfections, then God must be personal, right?
拥有思想、意志、自由、意图，这些都是我们作为人的完美的一部分。 Having mind, will, freedom, intention, all that's part of our perfection as persons.
因此，以一种超越的方式，这必定也适用于神。 Therefore in a super eminent way, it must be true of God.
神有思想、意志、意图、自由、创造力，当然他有。 God has mind, will, intention, freedom, creativity, of course he does.
任何说神只是某种抽象原则或只是一种力量之类的哲学。 Any philosophy that says God is just some abstract principle or he's just a force or something.
不，不。 No, no.
别这样，你知道整个星球大战的那套，说神就像贯穿万物的原力。 Don't, you know the whole Star Wars thing, that God is like the force that runs through all things.
哎。 Ho hum.
我是说，假设有这样的东西，谁知道呢？ I mean, let's say there is such a thing, who knows?
谁知道呢？ Who knows?
假设有这样的东西。 Let's say there is.
那不是神。 It's not God.
那只是某种被造的能量。 That's some created energy.
不，不。 No, no.
神是位格，因为神必须拥有每一种受造物的完美。 God is a person because God must have every creaturely perfection.
在这个标题下我们还能说什么？ What else can we say under this rubric?
我们必须说神是有爱的。 We must say that God is loving.
这是一个非常有趣的论点，是阿奎那提出的。 Now it's a very interesting argument, Thomas Aquinas makes it.
什么是爱？ What's to love?
爱就是愿他人得到美善，对吧？ To love is to will the good of the other, right?
这可能意味着我愿意得到我所寻求的缺失的美善。 Now that can mean I will the absent good that I seek.
所以我爱某物，我在寻求我没有的美善。 So I love something, I'm seeking a good I don't have.
或者它可能意味着我安息于、品味我所拥有的美善。 Or it can mean that I rest in, I savor the good that I possess.
想想看，从与你所爱的人在一起到观看棒球比赛，这些都是品味我所拥有的美善的形式。 Think of, you know, from being in the presence of someone you love to watching a baseball game, those are both forms of savoring a good that I possess.
神有思想和意志。 God has mind and will.
神是至善的。 God is supremely good.
所以神当然品味他自身的美善。 And so of course God savors the good that he is.
神爱他自己，进而神爱一切参与他存在的事物。 God loves himself and by extension God loves whatever participates in his being.
这意味着整个世界。 That means the whole world.
所以神是有智慧的。 So God is intelligent.
神有意志。 God has will.
神有目的。 God has purpose.
神有自由。 God has freedom.
神有美善。 God has goodness.
神是有爱的。 God is loving.
所有这些我都是从神的单纯性推导出来的，而神的单纯性又是从神的独一性推导出来的。 All of that I derive from the simplicity of God, which I derive from the unity of God.
明白吗？ Okay?
这就是肯定之路，我们还可以说更多。 That's the via positiva and there's much more we could say.
你知道，这实际上是我今天早上祷告时诵读的诗篇中的内容，是我晨祷的一部分。 You know, here's, this actually was in the psalm that I prayed this morning as part of my morning prayer.
那首美妙的诗篇说：「造眼的，难道自己不能看见吗？」 That lovely psalm that says, could the one who formed the eye himself not see?
「造耳的，难道自己不能听见吗？」 Could the one who formed the ear himself not hear?
你看他的论点是，看，视力是好事吗？ You see the argument he's making is, look, is seeing a good thing?
显然是。 Obviously.
造眼使人能看见的，难道自己不能看见吗？ Could the one who formed the eye to see himself not see?
现在，这并不意味着神用动物的眼睛看，就像我 们这样，那是一种非常有限的视觉方式，对吧？ Now, it doesn't mean God sees with a, with a, you know, animal eye like the way I have, which is a very limited way of seeing, right?
我只能看到眼前的东西，只能看到非常有限的光谱和颜色。 I get to see what's right in front of me and I can see according to a very limited spectrum of light and color.
我的意思是，如果神能造眼睛，那么他以一种超越的方式看见。 What I mean is, is if God can make the eye, well then he sees in this super eminent way.
这就是肯定之路的全部。 That's all the via positiva.
好的。 Okay.
那么否定之路呢？ How about the via negativa?
这里想想雕塑家。 Think here of a sculptor.
想想米开朗基罗，你知道，他有句名言：「我只是试图去掉围绕大卫的一切。」 Think of Michelangelo, you know, who famously said, I'm just trying to take away everything that surrounds David.
所以他看着这块巨大的大理石，说：「大卫就在里面。」 So he's looking at this great marble block and he said, David's in there.
我只需要去掉那块石头里不是大卫的一切，对吧？ I just got to take away everything in that block that's not David, right?
这就是天才的思考方式。 Now, that's the way a genius thinks about it.
现在，这是第一个例子。 Now, here's a first example.
我们说神是无限的。 We speak of God as infinite.
我知道这听起来像是一个肯定的词，但实际上不是。无限意味着没有薄度或没 有边界或限制，因为你看，边界会使某物具有潜在性，而不是纯粹现实态。 I know that can sound like a positive term, but it really isn't. Infinite means without thinness or without border or limit because see, a border would make something potential, not octus purus.
所以神的存在没有任何限制。 So God doesn't have any kind of limitation to his being.
那是什么样的呢？ Now, what's that like?
好吧，我挑战你去理解这个概念。 Well, I challenge you to get your mind around that idea.
你看，你做不到，因为头脑总是想要分类、归类和理解等等。 See, you can't because the mind always wants to categorize and put in boxes and understand and so on.
对于无限的神，那个没有边界的神，你无法这样做。 Well, you can't do that with the infinite God, the one without borders.
我们也用类似的方式说神是非物质的，不是吗？ We speak in a similar way of God as being immaterial, don't we?
这是一个肯定的陈述吗？ Is that a positive statement?
不完全是。 Not really.
我们说的是他不是物质的。 What we're saying is he's not material.
为什么呢？ Now, why?
你看，物质本质上是潜在的。 You see, matter by its very nature is potential.
物质可以变成其他东西。 Matter can become something else.
它可以改变形态。 It can change forms.
我可以把这个讲台烧成灰烬。 I could burn this podium to ash.
我可以拆掉这栋建筑，把它变成别的东西。 This building I could knock down and turn into something else.
物质本质上是潜在的。 Matter is by its very nature potential.
因此，神不能用物质来描述。 Therefore, God can't be characterized by matter.
他不是物质的。 He's not material.
那是什么样的呢？ Now, what's that like?
好吧，我挑战你对此提出一个真正清晰的概念。 Well, I challenge you to come up with a really clear idea of it.
这并不容易。 Not easy.
同样地，我们说神是不变的，永恒不变的。 In a similar way, we speak of God as being immutable, unchanging.
你明白为什么吗？ Well, you see why?
会变化的事物是潜在的。 Things that change are potential.
它们处于一种状态，然后变成其他东西。 They're in one state and they become something else.
正如阿奎那所说，它们从潜能转变为现实。 They move from potency to act, as Aquinas says.
而神没有任何潜能。 Well, God doesn't have any potency.
因此，神不会改变。 Therefore, God doesn't change.
请注意，不要认为这意味着神是冷漠无情的。 Now, mind you, don't take this to mean that God is cold and uncaring.
那是荒谬的。 That's ridiculous.
这只是意味着神不会以受造物的方式改变或变得更好。 It just means that God doesn't change or get better in a creaturely way.
事实上，神的不变性是我们对神信心的基础，不是吗？ In fact, God's immutability is the ground for our confidence in God, isn't it?
我们可以依靠神。 That we can rely upon God.
他不会改变。 He doesn't change.
但这本身积极意味着什么呢？ But what does that mean in itself, positively?
很难理解，因为我们经历的一切都是可变的。 Very hard to get our mind around because everything in our experience is mutable.
这是最后一个。 Here's the last one.
我们说神是永恒的，你可能会说，嗯，这听起来像是一个积极的概念，神会一直持续下去。 We speak of God as being eternal, and you say, well, that sounds like a positive idea that God, you know, goes on and on.
但这并不意味着神会一直持续下去。 Well, it doesn't mean that God goes on and on.
那将是某种在时间中无尽存在的东西。 That would be something existing endlessly in time.
想想吸血鬼，你知道，永远不死，一直活下去。 Think of like a vampire, you know, that never dies, lives on and on.
不，当我谈到神的永恒时，我的意思是他不受时间限制。 No, when I speak of God's eternity, I mean he's not temporal.
我的意思是他在时间之外，因为时间总是涉及变化。 I mean he's outside of time because time always involves change.
神是不变的。 There's no change in God.
时间涉及潜在性，如果我在这个时刻，然后在那个时刻，但神并不以这种方式存在。 Time involves potentiality if I'm in this moment of time and later in that moment of time, but God doesn't exist that way.
因此，他在时间之外。 Therefore he's outside of time.
那是什么样的？ What's that like?
给我一个真正积极的永恒概念。 Give me a really positive notion of eternity.
我不知道。 I don't know.
我真的无法想象。 I can't really imagine that.
我用这些词——非物质的、不变的、无限的、永恒的——所 做的是从神的概念中剔除任何带有受造物不完美性的东西。 What I'm doing with all these terms, immaterial, immutable, infinite, eternal, is I'm carving away from the idea of God, anything that smacks of creaturely imperfection.
考虑到所有这些关于创造的神学和诗意语言，教会如何理解科学或进化宇宙学？ Given all this theological and poetic language about creation, how does the church understand the scientific or evolutionary cosmology?
信仰与科学有冲突吗？ Is the faith in conflict with science?
不。我真正的问题之一是我们总是这样设置问题，或者 在大众想象中，它被视为科学和宗教之间的某种战争。 No. And one of the problems I really have is we always set the thing up that way, or in the popular imagination it's seen as some kind of war between science and religion.
我在描述神是万物的创造者时所讨论的，这是一种与科学提出的问题在质上不同的问题。 What I was talking about in describing God as creator of all things, that's a qualitatively different type of question than the questions raised by the sciences.
科学以经验方式研究世界。 The sciences examine the world empirically.
他们对其进行实验。 They experiment upon it.
他们提出假设。 They make hypotheses.
他们得出结论等。但这是关于经验可测量宇宙中的事物、对象和事件。 They draw conclusions, etc. But it's about the things, objects, and events within the empirically measurable universe.
我所问的问题更加根本，即为什么有东西而不是没有？ The question I'm asking is a more fundamental one, namely, why is there something rather than nothing?
科学所研究的世界为什么会存在？ Why would the world that science examines exist at all?
你看，这不是一个科学问题。 Well, see, that's not a scientific question.
它不可能是。 It can't be.
科学建立在这个基础之上，但这是一个更加根本的问题。 Science rests upon that, but it's a much more fundamental question.
在某些方面，我会这样说，在宗教和科学之间，我可能会放哲学。 In some ways I would say this, that in between religion and science, I might put philosophy.
有一条理性的路径，一系列理性的问题，它们不是科学的，但它们是理性的，值得考虑。 There's a rational path, a set of rational questions that aren't scientific, but they're rational and they're worth entertaining.
但我认为，在我们对科学、科学、科学的热情中， 我们倾向于忘记这一点，好像科学能回答一切。 But I think we've tended to forget about that in our enthusiasm for science, science, science, as though science answers everything.
科学能很好地回答一些事情，一些问题，但其他问题它甚至无法解决。 Science answers some things, some questions very well, others it can't even address.
其中之一就是，为什么有东西而不是没有？ One of them is, why is there something rather than nothing?
这是一个哲学问题，然后我会说最终是一个宗教问题。 That's a philosophical and then I would say ultimately religious question.
所以这就像是苹果和橘子。 So it's like apples and oranges.
人们总是希望它是两种苹果之间的战争。 People always want it to be a war between two types of apples.
这不是两种苹果，而是苹果和橘子。 It's not two types of apples, it's apples and oranges.
好的，现在我们已经讨论了几个词。 Okay, so now we've covered a handful of words.
这需要一点时间。 It's going to take a little while.
所以我相信独一的神，我所做的是从关于神的论证和神的 独一性中推导出这些不同的名称，我们还可以说更多。 So I believe in one God and what I've done is I've derived from the argument for God and from the unity of God, these various names and there's much more we could say about it.
但我现在想转到信经中的下一个短语。 But I want to move now to the next phrase in the creed.
我信独一全能的父神。 I believe in one God, the Father Almighty.
这里有一种巧妙的模糊性，因为信经会谈到圣父是三位一体的第一位格，我们稍后会讲到。 Now there's a kind of an eloquent ambiguity here because the creed will talk about the Father as the first person of the Trinity and we'll get there.
但我认为这里谈到神是父时，它谈论的不是三位 一体的第一位格，而是作为万物创造者的神。 But I think here when it talks about God as Father, it's talking not so much about the first person of the Trinity as about God as the creator of all things.
你看，因为父亲是产生另一个的人，对吧？ You see, because a father is someone who gives rise to another, right?
父亲在自己之外产生某些东西。 The father generates something outside of himself.
所以在这种情况下，我们谈论的是神产生整个有限实在，即创造主神。 So in this case, we're talking about God generating the whole of finite reality, God the creator.
首先要问的问题，也是一个令人困惑的问题，神为什么创造？ First question to ask, and it's a puzzling question, why does God create?
神就是神，对吧？ God is God, right?
纯粹现实态，纯粹的行动，完全完美，单纯，纯粹的存在行为。 Actus purus, pure act, utterly perfect, simple, the sheer act of existing.
一切本体论上的完美都属于他。 Any and all ontological perfection belongs to Him.
因此创造不能给他的存在增添任何东西。 Therefore creation can add nothing to His being.
创造对神没有任何好处。 There's no advantage to God in creating.
那么他为什么创造呢？ So how come He creates?
我的意思是，我做的任何事情，总是涉及某种自身利益。 I mean, anything I do, there's always some kind of self-interest involved.
神必须创造，因为显然他已经创造了，对吧？ God must create, since obviously He has, right?
这是我们可以肯定的一件事。 That's one thing we can say for sure.
我们可以看到它。 We can see it.
神创造不是出于需要，而是出于纯粹的爱。 God creates not out of need, but therefore out of sheerest love.
正如我所说，爱就是愿他人得到美善。 To love is to will the good of the other, as I said.
你看到这是神对他所造的世界所能做的全部吗？ Do you see how that's all God can do vis-a-vis the world that He makes?
因为他不从中获益。 Because He doesn't benefit from it.
他不需要它。 He doesn't need it.
他不能从中获得任何进一步的完美。 He can't derive any further perfection from it.
因此，他这样做是出于最纯粹的爱，自我奉献。 Therefore He does so out of the sheerest love, self-gift.
不要把这个词情感化。 Don't sentimentalize the term.
我知道我们可能会对「爱」这个词变得多愁善感，好像它只是一种短暂的感觉。 I know we can get kind of drippy and sentimental with the word love, as though it's a passing feeling.
不，它是意志的行为。 No, it's an act of the will.
世界从一刻到另一刻的存在见证了，这也是神秘主义者所直觉到 的，世界从一刻到另一刻的存在见证了它正被爱而存在的事实。 The very existence of the world from moment to moment witnesses, and this is what the mystics have intuited, the very existence of the world from moment to moment witnesses to the fact that it's being loved into existence.
我认为这很美，非常美。 Beautiful I think, beautiful.
关于创造，关于神生育世界，我们现在还能说些什么？ What can we say now further about creation, about God's fathering forth of the world?
首先，不要把它看作是在时间中发生的事情，好像时间在 前进，然后在某个时刻，神创造了，然后时间继续前进。 First of all, don't think of it in terms of something that happened in time, as though time is marching along, and then at a certain point, God created, and then time keeps marching on.
不，你看，时间本身就是一个受造物。 No, see, time is itself a creature.
神是永恒的。 God is eternal.
他在时间之外。 He's outside of time.
时间随着世界的产生而产生。 Time comes to be with the coming to be of the world.
时间本身是神所造的，这暗示了一件非常重要的事。 Time itself is something that God makes, and this implies something of great importance.
创造不是很久以前发生然后就结束了。 Creation didn't just happen way back when and then is over.
相反，创造是一个持续的事件。 Rather, creation is an ongoing event.
阿奎那谈到持续创造，连续不断的创造。 Aquinas talks about creatio continua, continual creation.
当代多明我会神学家赫伯特·麦凯布说，神维持宇宙的方式就像歌手维持一首歌。 Herbert McCabe, the contemporary Dominican theologian, says that God sustains the universe the way a singer sustains a song.
这不是很美妙吗？ Isn't that lovely?
想想一个歌剧歌手在唱歌。 Think about an opera singer singing.
这首歌每时每刻都依赖于歌剧歌手的自我奉献。 The song depends from moment to moment on the opera singer's self-gift.
因此，纯粹现实态，那单纯的神，不断地将有限宇宙唱入存在。 And so actus purus, the simple God, continually sings the finite universe into being.
这就是创造的含义。 That's what creation means.
创造教义的另一个含义是万物彼此相连。 A further implication of the doctrine of creation is that all things are connected to one another.
现在，我知道当我们从表面上看世界时，很容易把我们看作是 分离的个体，所有的人、动物和事物等等，都是分离的个体。 Now, I know it's easy to, as we look at the world at sort of a superficial level, to see us as separate individuals, all the people and animals and things and so on, separate individuals.
但想想这个。 But think of this.
每一刻，我们每个人都来自同一个创造源。 Every moment, every one of us is coming forth from the same creative source.
所以当我找到我最深处的中心，正如托马斯·默顿所说，那个我此时此刻正 被神创造的地方，这是默顿的说法，但也完全是托马斯·阿奎那的观点。 So when I find my deepest center, as Thomas Merton said, that place in me where I am here and now being created by God, that's Merton, but it's entirely Thomas Aquinas too.
当我找到我被神创造的那个地方时，我也在你身上和其他每个人身上找到了同样的地方。 When I find that place in me where I am being created by God, I found the same place in you and the same place in everybody else.
事实上，正如圣方济各所说的，在兄弟太阳和姐妹月亮中也有同样的地方。 In fact, the same place in, as St. Francis put it, brother, son, and sister moon.
这不仅仅是高深的诗歌。 That's not just high poetry.
这是准确的形而上学。 That's accurate metaphysics.
太阳、月亮、行星和星星确实是我们的兄弟姐妹 ，所有的创造物都通过创造主神联系在一起。 The sun and moon and planets and stars are indeed brothers and sisters to us, all of creation linked together through God the creator.
根据这个创造教义，我们还能说些什么？ What else can we say in light of this doctrine of creation?
嗯，我们必须谈论神的护理。 Well, we must speak of God's providence.
你知道，我们有时会被一种自然神论所诱惑，认为神是很久以前的一个遥远原因， 或者被一种星球大战式的神秘主义所诱惑，认为神只是一种模糊的非人格力量。 You know, again, we're tempted sometimes by a sort of deism that says God is a distant cause way back when, or maybe by a sort of Star Wars mysticism by which God is just a vague impersonal force.
不，不，不。 No, no, no.
神以本质、临在和能力存在于万物之中，是的。 God in all things by essence, presence, and power, yes.
神每分每秒都临在于万物，是的。 God present to all things every minute, yes.
神在哪里？ Where's God?
无处不在。 Everywhere.
但是听着，神是思想、意志、自由、创造力和目的，他绝不会愚钝地存在于事物中。 But listen, God who is mind and will and freedom and creativity and purpose can never be dumbly present to things.
神总是以思想、意志、目的、自由和创造力临在。 God is always present with mind and will and purpose and freedom and creativity.
换句话说，他对所有的创造都有护理。 In other words, he's providential over all of creation.
这就是重点。 That's the point.
阿奎那喜欢引用智慧书中那句美妙的话。 That lovely quote from the book of Wisdom, Aquinas loved to cite it.
我也喜欢引用它。 I love to cite it too.
神的智慧有力地从宇宙的一端延伸到另一端，甜美地安排万物。 The wisdom of God stretches from end to end of the universe mightily and orders all things sweetly.
太棒了。 Terrific.
让我再说一遍。 Let me say it again.
神的智慧有力地从宇宙的一端延伸到另一端，甜美地安排万物。 The wisdom of God stretches from end to end of the universe mightily and orders all things sweetly.
不是某些事物，不是只有高尚的事物，不，不，不，不，是所有事物。 Some things, just the high things, no, no, no, no, all things.
托马斯·阿奎那说，神的护理延伸到具体事物。 Thomas Aquinas says that God's providence extends to particulars.
太美妙了。 Lovely.
换句话说，他不仅对高尚重要的实在有护理，而是他的护理延伸到所有实在。 In other words, he's not just providential over the high important realities, but rather his providence extends to all reality.
从大天使到地上爬行的昆虫。 From the archangels to insects crawling on the ground.
当我说这些话时，神此刻是否以护理的方式临在？ Is God present providentially right now as I speak these words?
是的。 Yes.
他的护理延伸到具体事物。 His providence extends to particulars.
我可以建议大家，灵性生活的核心是认识到你此刻正被一位有护理的神引导的那个地方。 Can I suggest everybody that's at the heart of the spiritual life is to come to recognize that place where you are not right now being directed by a providential God.
现在根据这一点，自然会产生一个问题，那我的自由呢？ Now in light of this, a question naturally arises, well how about my freedom?
如果神对万事万物都有护理，包括我所做的一切，我怎么还有真正的自由？ If God is providential over all things, including everything I do, how do I have any real freedom?
嗯，我们必须理解自由的含义。 Well, we have to understand what freedom means.
有一种更现代的自由理解，将自由解释为自我决定。 There's a more modern understanding of freedom that construes liberty as self-determination.
对吧？ Right?
我决定做什么。 I decide what to do.
我决定我将成为什么样的人。 I decide who I will be.
我有A、B、C选项，没有任何约束，我说我要选择A选项。这就是自由。 I got option A, B, C, and without any sort of constraint, I say I'm going to go with option A. And that's freedom.
如果这就是自由，那么神的护理就是对我自由的一种威胁。 Well if that's what freedom is, then God's providence is a kind of threat to my freedom.
事实上，如果我沿着这些思路思考自由，我最终会对神产生反感。 In fact, if I start thinking about freedom along those lines, I'm going to end up becoming antipathetic to God.
现在读读西方哲学史，它直接导致了18和19世纪的无神论者。 Now read the history of Western philosophy that leads right up to the atheists in the 18th and 19th century.
但我建议你，有一种更古典、更符合圣经的自由理解，它不是把自由看作自我决 定，而是看作对欲望的约束，以使实现善首先成为可能，然后变得毫不费力。 But I would suggest to you there's a more classical, more biblical understanding of freedom that sees it not so much as self-determination, but rather as the disciplining of desire so as to make the achievement of the good first possible and then effortless.
我知道这听起来有点抽象，但当我给你一些例子时，你就会明白我的意思。 Now I know that sounds a little bit abstract, but you'll know what I mean now when I give you some examples.
所以我现在站在你面前，是一个相当自由的英语使用者。 So I'm before you right now as a pretty free speaker of English.
我的意思是，我可以用英语说几乎任何我想说的话。 I mean, I can say pretty much whatever I want in English.
作为一个学习过其他语言的人，我知道不自由是什么感觉。 And as someone who's studied other languages, I know what it feels like to be unfree.
你试图说出你想说的话。 You're trying to say what you want.
我记得多年前在巴黎的一个研讨班上，我知道我想说什么，但我的法语太差了，我说不对。 I remember being in a seminar class in Paris years ago and I knew what I wanted to say, but my French was so bad that I couldn't say it right.
或者现在当我学习西班牙语并讲道时，我知道我想说什么，但我说不出来。 Or now when I'm studying Spanish and I'm preaching and I know what I want to say, but I can't quite come out with it.
好的，这是一种不自由的形式。 Okay, that's a form of unfreedom.
嗯，我是一个自由的英语使用者。 Well, I'm a free speaker of English.
为什么？ Why?
嗯，因为我小时候决定想怎么说就怎么说。 Well, because I decided when I was a kid to speak any way I wanted.
得了吧。 Come on.
当我还是个孩子时，我学习了语法、词汇，并效仿周围许多其他英语使用者的例子。 When I was a kid, I took in syntax and grammar and vocabulary and the example of so many other speakers of English around me.
我吸收了英语的精华，最终它成为了我的一部分。 I incorporated the good of English so it became eventually part of me.
它成为了我的第二天性。 It became second nature to me.
任何学过乐器的人都知道我在说什么。 Anyone that's learned to play a musical instrument knows what I'm talking about.
嘿，去那里，在钢琴上随意弹奏你想弹的。 Hey, just go there and play anywhere you want on the piano.
当然不是这样的。 Well, of course not.
你上课、练习、听其他钢琴演奏者的演奏、听老师的指导 ，你吸收了弹钢琴的技巧，直到它成为你的第二天性。 You took in lessons and you exercised and you listened to other piano players and you listened to your teacher and you incorporated the moves of piano playing until it became second nature to you.
直到你变得足够自由，可以弹奏你想弹的。 Until you became free enough to play what you wanted.
你看，在这第二种对自由的理解中，善不是自由的敌人。 Well, see, in this second understanding of freedom, the good is not the enemy of freedom.
它是自由可能性的条件。 It's the condition for the possibility of freedom.
所以，神，那至高的善，那位以护理临在于万物的神，他是在试图压制我的自由吗？ So God, the supreme good, God who providentially is present to all things, is he trying to suppress my freedom?
不。神正在唤醒我的自由。 No. God is awakening my freedom.
我可以把我的整个生命看作是神引导和邀请我进入越 来越深的自由的过程，当我吸收他向我展示的善。 I can think of my whole life as just a process of God luring and inviting me into a deeper and deeper freedom as I incorporate the good that he holds out to me.
啊，现在我们说到点子上了。 Ah, now we're talking.
正如圣爱任纽所说，神的荣耀就是人完全活出生命，神以我的自 由为荣，这实际上是他护理的恩赐，而不是与他的护理相对立。 The glory of God as a human being fully alive, as St. Irenaeus said, God glories in my freedom, which in fact is a gift of his providence, not opposed to his providence.
这让我想到了可能是神学中所有问题中的问题。 And that leads me to maybe the problem of problems in all of theology.
有人说神学本身就是试图回应这个问题。 Some say that theology itself is an attempt to respond to this problem.
如果你一直在听，你说，好的，主教，我明白了。 If you've been listening so far and you say, okay, Bishop, I get it.
神存在，是纯粹现实态，他充满思想、意志和爱，他对万物都有护理。 God exists and actus purus and he's full of mind and will and love and he's providential over all things.
他并不威胁我的自由。 He's not threatening my freedom.
好的，好的。 Okay, okay.
我同意你的观点。 I'm with you.
但是我告诉你，主教，我犹豫的地方是邪恶的问题，苦难的问题。 But I tell you, Bishop, where I balk is the problem of evil, the problem of suffering.
如果神存在，他是善的，他有护理，为什么世界上有这么多苦难和邪恶？ If God exists and he's good and he's providential, why in the world is there so much suffering and so much evil?
好吧，我要说的是。 Well, I'll say this.
我做神父已经35年了。 I've been a priest for 35 years.
我一生都是基督徒。 I've been a Christian all my life.
这是一个真正的问题吗？ A real problem?
当然是。 You bet.
我内心深处感受到了吗？ Do I feel it in my bones?
是的，我当然感受到了。 Yeah, of course I do.
每个稍有反思、稍有经验的人都理解这个问题的现实性。 Everyone who's the least bit reflective, who's had the least bit of experience, understands the reality of this problem.
现在我们可以对这个问题、这个疑问说一些回应。 Now there are some things we can say in response to this issue, this question.
第一点，这是年轻的圣奥古斯丁的一个伟大发现，即 邪恶不是一种积极的力量，不是与善对立的东西。 A first one, and it was a great discovery of the young St. Augustine, namely that evil is not a positive force, not something that stands as a rival to the good.
不要想象原力的黑暗面和光明面。 Don't think about dark side and light side of the force.
我又在批评星球大战了。 I'm going after Star Wars again.
但邪恶不是一种积极的力量。 But evil is not a positive force.
相反，它是奥古斯丁所看到的，用他的拉丁语说 是privatio boni，即善的缺失。 Rather, it's what Augustine saw, a privatio boni in his Latin, a privation of the good.
它是本应存在的善的缺失。 It's a lack of a good that ought to be there.
想想牙齿中的蛀洞。 Think of a cavity in a tooth.
想想疾病导致的器官损害。 Think of the compromising of an organ caused by disease.
邪恶不是善的对手，而是寄生于善之上。 Evil is not a rival to the good, but it's parasitic upon the good.
换句话说，第一步不是给邪恶太多本体论上的重要 性，不要把神看作是在与某种平等的对手作战。 In other words, the first move is not to give too much ontological weight to evil, to see God as fighting against some sort of co-equal rival.
所以我们不说神创造邪恶，而是说神允许邪恶。 So we speak not of God creating the evil, but of God permitting evil.
你说，好吧，我明白了。 And you say, well, okay, I get that.
但这仍然回避了问题，不是吗？ But it still begs the question, doesn't it?
为什么神会允许邪恶，而且是如此大规模的邪恶，当 我们看到个人生活中和更广泛意义上的巨大苦难时？ Why would God permit evil, indeed on such a massive scale, as we look at the tremendous suffering in individual lives and then in a more global sense?
为什么神会允许这样的邪恶？ Why would God permit such evil?
第二个伟大的洞见，也是奥古斯丁的直觉之一，就是神允许邪恶是为了从中带出更大的善。 Well, second great insight, also one of Augustine's intuitions, that God permits evil so as to bring out of it a greater good.
再次说明，我认为我们可以很容易地理解这个原 则，事实上我们在自己的生活中经常看到它。 Now again, I think we can grasp the principle pretty easily, and in fact we see it frequently enough in our own lives.
哦，那份我想要但没得到的工作让我非常生气和沮丧，但它引导 我找到了另一份工作，事实证明那份工作对我来说要好得多。 Oh, there's that job that I wanted and I didn't get it and I was so angry and so frustrated, but that led me to another job which actually proved to be so much better for me.
还有那所学校。 There's that school.
哦，我想进那所大学但没有被录取。 Oh, I wanted to get into that university and I didn't get in.
这看起来似乎只有坏处。 It would seem like nothing but evil.
但它让我去了另一所大学，在那里我遇到了我的配偶。 But it sent me to another university where I met my spouse.
我是说，我失去了这段友谊，但这种失去实际上导致了我对神的信仰加深。 I mean, I lost this friendship, but the loss of it actually led to a deepening of my faith in God.
我是说，我们在自己的生活中可以看到大量这样的例子。 I mean, we can see examples galore of this in our own lives.
然而，我们并不总能看到它，是吗？ However, we can't always see it, can we?
有些邪恶，无论是在个人还是全球层面上，似乎很难用这个原则来解释。 There are some evils, both again on the personal and the global level, that seem very hard to justify by this principle.
但再次记住，托马斯·阿奎那在这一点上非常坚定。 But again, keep this in mind, and Thomas Aquinas was so strong on this.
我们对事物的视野是如此有限。 Our vision of things is so limited.
我们能理解的那一点空间和时间，而神在处理所有的空间和所有的时间。 The little bit of space and time that we can take in, where God is working with all of space and all of time.
允许某种邪恶存在是否有道德上可辩护的理由？ Is there a morally justifiable reason for permitting a given evil?
嗯，有时我能看到，是的。 Well, sometimes I can see it, yeah.
大多数时候我看不到。但我视野的局限，我理解的不足，不应该决定这个问题。 Most times I can't. But my lack of vision, my lack of understanding, should not determine the question.
神允许某些邪恶存在是否有道德上可辩护的理由？ Does God have a morally justifiable reason for permitting certain evils?
我认为我们必须说是。 I think we have to say yes.
这不就是约伯记的全部要点吗？ Which is the whole point of the book of Job, isn't it?
当约伯抱怨神的不公时，神抱怨他正在忍受的巨大邪恶。 As Job complains of God's injustice, God complains of the great evil he was enduring.
神的回答是：「约伯啊，我立大地根基的时候，你在哪里呢？」 And God's answer, Job, where were you when I laid the foundations of the world?
换句话说，约伯，你对我对整个宇宙的护理引导知道多少？ In other words, Job, what do you know about my providential guidance of the entire universe?
你对我为什么允许某些邪恶存在知道多少？ What do you know about why I permit certain evils?
这些原则并不能解答这个问题。 These principles don't answer the problem.
我从多年的牧养事工中知道这一点。 I know that from so many years of pastoral ministry.
我认为，它们至少提供了一个接近这个问题的框架。 They at least provide, I think, a framework for approaching the question.
关于邪恶的问题，我理解这个论点，但我仍然挣扎，特别是当邪恶表现为痛苦和残酷时。 In terms of the problem of evil, I get the argument, but I still struggle, particularly when evil manifests itself as pain and cruelty.
每个人都是如此。 Everybody does.
我完全理解。 I totally get that.
你可以像我那样阐述伟大的原则，但在本能层面上，我们仍然感受到这种压力和困难。 You can lay out the great principles, as I did, but still, at a visceral level, we feel the press and the difficulty of this.
我完全理解这一点。 I completely understand that.
我可以分享一些我自己牧养经历中的简单故事。 I might just share a couple of simple stories from my own pastoral experience.
第一个故事是关于我多年前遇到的一位年轻父亲。 The first one has to do with a young father that I met many years ago.
他大约三岁的儿子需要做手术。 His son, who was about three, had to go in for surgery.
我忘了原因，但足够严重到需要做手术。 I forget why, but something serious enough to warrant surgery.
父亲告诉我，手术后，这个小孩非常痛苦，非常不舒服。 The father said to me, after the surgery, the young kid was in such pain, such discomfort.
他一直看着他的父亲，好像在说：「看，我不明白这是怎么回事。」 He kept looking at his father as if to say, look, I don't get this.
你不是在支持我吗？ Aren't you supporting me here?
你不是站在我这边吗？ Aren't you on my side?
你怎么能主持这场灾难呢？ How could you be somehow presiding over this disaster?
父亲对我说，让我痛苦的是，我甚至无法开始向他解释。 The father said to me, what killed me was, I couldn't even begin to explain it to him.
他已经足够大，能感受到痛苦和困惑，但还不够大，无法理解像手术这样复 杂的事情，手术会从你身上拿走一些东西，但从长远来看，你会变得更好。 He was old enough to feel the pain and to feel the confusion of it, but not old enough to understand something as complex as, well, surgery, which takes something out of you, but in the long run, you'll be better.
父亲想解释为什么儿子要经历这种痛苦。 The father wanted to explain why the son was going through this pain.
他做不到。 He couldn't do it.
这让我觉得这是我们与神之间关系的一个非常有趣的类比。 It struck me as a really interesting analogy to us vis-a-vis God.
我们可能正在经历有着伟大道德和救赎目的的苦难，但我们看不到，即使神 想向我们解释，他也无法解释，因为他的心智能力涵盖所有的空间和时间， 而我们的能力只涵盖如此小的一片空间和时间，两者之间存在根本的差异。 Might we be going through suffering that does have a great moral and salvific purpose, but we can't see it, and even if God wanted to explain it to us, he couldn't because of the radical difference between his mental capacity, which covers all of space and time, and mine, ours, that covers such a little swath of space and time.
这是第二个故事。 Here's the second story.
这个故事有些相关，但我多年前在一个教区帮忙，每个星期天都有一个年轻 的家庭来到这个教区，父母带着大约五个孩子，其中一个小女孩身体和精神 都有严重残疾，她被绑在椅子上，他们坐在弥撒的前排，这个小女孩在弥撒 期间经常变得焦躁或烦躁，当我看到她时，我会想，想想她经历的苦难。 It's somewhat related, but I was helping out at a parish many years ago, and every Sunday to this parish would come this, again, younger family, mom and dad with about five kids, and one of the kids, a young girl, was very handicapped, both physically and mentally, and she was sort of strapped into her chair, and they would sit in the front section right there at Mass, and the little girl during Mass often became agitated or kind of fussy, and as I'd see her, I'd think, just think of the suffering she's gone through.
想想这个家庭经历的苦难，但你知道什么总是引起我的注意吗？ Think of the suffering this family's gone through, but you know what always caught my eye?
她的一个兄弟，我想可能和她年龄相仿，也许稍微小一点，不超过九或十岁，这 个小家伙，一周又一周，不引人注目，非常平静地照顾他的姐姐，当她变得焦躁 时，他会照顾她，你知道，在身体上，他会很温和地、不引人注目地安抚她。 One of her brothers, who was, I'd say, maybe around her age, maybe a little younger, no more than nine or ten, this little guy, week after week, without drawing any attention to himself, very calmly would attend to his sister when she got agitated, and he would take care of her, you know, physically, and he would kind of calm her down, very, you know, kindly, unobtrusively.
我记得我在思考，你知道，为什么这个家庭要经历这种苦难？ Well, I remember reflecting, you know, why is this family going through this suffering?
我不知道。 I don't know.
我没有足够广阔的视野来看清原因，但我突然想到， 这个兄弟是否正在成长为一个有着非凡同情心的人？ I don't have the breadth of vision to see why, but it occurred to me, is that brother growing as a person of extraordinary compassion?
他姐姐的苦难是否正在使他成为一个有着非常富有同情心的人？ Is his sister's suffering making him someone with a very compassionate heart?
然后我让我的思绪飘远，向前二十、三十年。 And then I sort of allowed my mind to drift, go forward twenty, thirty years.
这个年轻人可能会有一个儿子，他将这种同情心传给儿子，然后在更遥 远的未来的某一天，这个儿子又有了一个女儿，他又将这种同情心传给 女儿，而这个女儿恰恰在教会最需要这样一位圣人的时候成为了圣人？ Might that young man have a son to whom he passes on that same compassionate heart, who then one day in the even more distant future has a daughter to whom he passes on that same compassionate heart, and that daughter becomes a saint precisely at the time when the church most needs exactly that saint?
我明白我在做什么。 I see what I'm doing.
你知道，我不是在试图解释它，也不是说，哦，这就 解决了问题，但我在试图指向一种思考它的方式。 I'm not trying to, you know, explain it, and, oh, that solves the problem, but I'm trying to gesture toward a way of thinking about it.
神不仅仅看当下，而我们自然倾向于这样做，你知道，我们陷入了某种可怕的苦难中。 God looks not just at the here and now, as we tend to do naturally, you know, we're caught up in some terrible suffering.
神掌管所有的空间和所有的时间。 God has command of all of space and all of time.
为什么那个孩子在受苦？ Why is that child suffering?
为什么那个家庭要经历那种苦难？ Why was that family going through that suffering?
也许答案要在他们都离开很久之后才能得到。 Maybe the answer is long after all of them are gone.
答案在神的时间里，在神的空间里，带着神的目的，而这些我们看不清楚。 The answer is in God's time, in God's space, with God's purpose in mind, which we can't see clearly.
这两个都不能解决问题。 Neither one of those solves the problem.
当然不能。但在我看来，它们为这个问题的动态性提供了某种启示。 Of course it doesn't. But they shed certain light, it seems to me, on the dynamics of this question.
现在我要在这次谈话中讨论的最后一个话题是，我们说神是全 能的父，是天地的创造者，是一切有形无形之物的创造者。 The last topic now I'll use in this talk, I'll address in this talk, we speak of God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible.
从某种意义上说，天地只是古人表达一切的方式，对吧？ Now in one sense, heaven and earth is just an ancient way of saying everything, right?
上面的，下面的，中间的一切，天地。 What's up, what's down, everything in between, heaven and earth.
但我喜欢加上那个小短语，一切有形无形之物。 But I like the addition of that little phrase, all things visible and invisible.
可见的世界，我是说，是的。 The visible world, I mean, yes.
它是多么辉煌啊。 How splendid it is.
夜晚仰望星空，在海滩上漫步，看看那壮丽的景象。 Look up into the starry sky at night, walk on the beach and look at the splendor of that display.
看看人的内心。 Look into the heart of a human being.
我是说，可见的宇宙在其美丽和复杂性上是令人惊叹的。 I mean, the visible universe is stunning in its beauty and complexity.
但是否存在一个我们肉眼看不见的世界维度？ But is there a dimension of the world that's not visible to our eyes?
神也创造了更加壮观和令人惊叹的东西。 That's even more spectacular and stunning that God has also created.
好吧，我给你一个提示。 Well I'll give you one hint.
实际上，我们一直在与看不见的事物打交道。 We deal with the invisible actually all the time.
每当我们处理数字或数学或几何对象时，你知道我在高中时就学到，当你画 一条线时，你用铅笔画的那条可见的线只是一个符号，那不是真正的线。 Any time we deal with numbers or with mathematical or geometrical objects, you know I learned that when I was a high school student, when you draw a line, well that line that you can see that you drew with your pencil, that's just a symbol, that's not the line.
它是一个不可见现实的可见符号。 It's the visible symbol of an invisible reality.
我画一个三角形或变成一个金字塔，那个草图只是一个符号，不是吗 ？它代表我头脑中想象的纯粹三角形，我头脑中持有的纯粹圆柱体。 I sketch a triangle or I turn into a pyramid, well that sketch is just a symbol, isn't it, of the pure triangle that my mind entertains, the pure cylinder that my mind holds.
请注意，工程师们用这些看不见的现实来建造非常可见的东西。 And mind you, engineers use these invisible realities to build very visible things.
这些不是狂野的幻想，这些是现实，虽然看不见，但我们一直在接触的真实事物。 These aren't wild fantasies, these are realities, invisible to be sure, but real that we come in contact with all the time.
想想数字七。 Think of the number seven.
我可以把它写成一个符号，那就是全部，一个纯粹抽象的符号，数字七。 I can write it as a symbol, that's all that is, the symbol of a pure abstraction, the number seven.
你知道几个世纪前谁看到了这一点吗？是柏拉图。 You know who saw this centuries ago was Plato.
当我们从仅仅是对世界的普通感性印象的洞穴中 逃脱时，他认为，我们首先来到数学的层面。 When we escape from the cave of just our ordinary sensible impressions of the world, we come first, he thinks, to the level of mathematics.
真实的，嗯哼，看不见的，你说对了，神也是那个领域的创造者。 Real, uh-huh, invisible, you bet, and God is the creator of that realm as well.
现在更进一步。 Now go higher.
圣经见证了神的创造中有天使的存在，纯粹的灵，像神一样属灵但不 像神一样无限，像我们一样是受造物但像神一样属灵，这就是天使。 The Bible witnesses to the presence within God's creation of angels, of pure spirits, spiritual like God but not infinite like God, creatures like us but spiritual like God, the angels.
当然，那个美妙的词「天使」来自希腊语angelos，只是意味着使者。 Of course that lovely word angel from the Greek angelos just means messenger.
把他们想象成这个可见现实世界和神的领域之间的中介。 Think of them as mediators between this world of visible reality and the realm of God.
Angeloi，天使，在它们之间调解。 Angeloi, angels, mediate between them.
我想到圣经中天使以可见的形式出现并与人说话的情景。 I think of this in the Bible when angels appear in visible form and they speak to people.
想象一个成年人可以俯就进入一个小孩的经验和思维。 Think of an adult who can condescend as it were to enter into the experience and mind of a little child.
一个成年人可以蹲下来，使用非常简单的语言，进入小孩的思想世 界和经验世界，但原则上小孩永远无法上升到成人对话的水平。 An adult could, you know, crouch down and use very simple language and move into the thought world and experience world of a little child but the child could never in principle rise up and have an adult conversation.
想想这些天使，这些纯粹的灵，它们是神的无形创造的一部分。 Well think of these angels, these pure spirits, part of God's invisible creation.
他们能否俯就我们，进入我们非常有限的经验，尽管我们自己无法上升到他们的复杂程度？ Can they as it were condescend to us, enter into our very limited experience even though we cannot on our own rise up to their level of complexity?
我认为这就是angeloi，使者与我们沟通的方式。 That's I think how the angeloi, the messengers communicate with us.
如果有天使，这些非物质的灵，想象其中一些会堕落是否很难？ Well if there are angels, immaterial spirits, is it that hard to imagine that some of them would have fallen?
所以我们是有形体的灵。 So we're embodied spirits.
有少数圣人，我们大多数人是罪人，在某种程度上已经远离了神。 There are a handful of saints, most of us are sinners, who have to some degree fallen away from God.
想象这些灵中的一些会堕落到反叛神是否很难？ Is it that hard to imagine that some of these spirits would have fallen into rebellion against God?
我们称这些堕落的天使为魔鬼。 We call these fallen angels the devils.
神的对手？ Rivals to God?
不可能，别开玩笑了。 Hardly, come on.
神没有对手。 There's no rival to God.
邪恶总是善的缺失，不是吗？ Evil is always a privation of the good, isn't it?
魔鬼的思想、意志、力量、自由，所有这些都是好的，都来自神。 The devil's mind, will, power, freedom, all that is good, all that's from God.
扭曲和邪恶的东西，魔鬼的反叛，是寄生在善上的。 What's twisted and perverse, the devil's rebellion, that's parasitical upon the good.
神允许它们存在，确实如此。 God permits them, yes indeed.
为什么呢？ How come?
我不知道，也许有一天我们会知道。 I don't know, maybe someday we'll know.
魔鬼是真实存在的，但它们不是神的对手，它们是受造物。 Devils are real, but they're not rivals to God, they're creatures.
在神的护理下，在神的权柄下，神创造了一切有形无形的事物。 Under God's providence, under God's authority, God makes all things visible and invisible.
让我以此结束。 And let me close with this.
把神想象成纯粹现实态，存在本身，单纯的神，就像纯白光。 Think of God, octus purus, being itself, the simple God, as like pure white light.
你知道，白色包含所有颜色，但白光通过棱镜后会分解成各种颜色。 You know, the color white contains all colors, but the white light passes through a prism and then it breaks into a variety of colors.
现在把创造想象成神完美的无限强烈的白光，通过某种棱 镜折射，表现为这种丰富多样的颜色、复杂性和多样性。 Think of creation now as the infinitely intense white light of God's perfection, breaking through a kind of prism and manifesting itself as this wild diversity of color, complexity, variety.
在可见的秩序中，是的，在不可见的秩序中也是如此。 In the visible order, yes, and in the invisible order as well.
所有这些都作为不可见之神的一种象征在发挥作用。 All of it functioning as a kind of icon of the invisible God.
所有这些都在受造秩序中作为神完美的彰显在发挥作用。 All of it functioning as a manifestation in the creaturely order of God's perfection.
有些人会问，这些关于神的信仰是否只是受文化 约束，而不是指向某种真实事物的客观真理。 Some people would ask whether these beliefs about God are just bound by the culture, rather than being one objective truth pointing to something real.
为什么基督教的神是真实的，而异教世界或其他宗教的神不是？ Why is the Christian God true and not the gods of the pagan world or other religions?
好吧，我的第一个观察是这样的。 Well, the first observation I make is this.
说「我们是对的，他们都是错的」是不对的。 It's not right to say, you know, we're right, they're all wrong.
事情并不是那么非黑即白。 It's not as black and white as that.
在世界所有伟大的宗教和宗教哲学中都有真理的光芒，都有真理的迹象。 There are rays of light, there are indications of truth in all the great religions and religious philosophies of the world.
所以这不是严格的非此即彼。 So it's not a strict either or.
例如，在异教神话中，众神和女神象征性地代表了伟大的自然必然性。 For example, in the pagan mythology, the gods and goddesses represent, I would say symbolically, the great natural necessities.
想想海洋、天空、大地是如何被拟人化的。 Think of the way, you know, the ocean is personified, the way the sky is personified, the way the earth is personified.
这些故事告诉我们关于自然必然性的伟大真理。 And those stories tell us great truths about the natural necessities.
我可以对其他伟大的宗教说类似的话。 I could say something similar about other great religions.
它们讲述了一些真理。 They speak some truth.
但回到你问题的第一部分，假设你正在为此挣扎。 But to your first part of the question, let's say you're struggling with this.
你想知道，这个基督教的启示是真实的吗？ You want to know, is this Christian revelation, you know, true?
嗯，你可以使用我刚才用的一些哲学论证来说，是的，用我的理性，我可 以确定神存在，神是无限的，神是位格的，神是创造者，神是有护理的。 Well, you could use some of the philosophical arguments I was using to say, well, yeah, using my reason, I can determine that God exists, that God is infinite, that God is personal, that God is the creator, that God is provident.
嗯，所有这些都包含在圣经中。 Well, all of that's contained in the Bible.
因此，圣经中的神的形象与我的理性所认识到的是一致的。 And so that image of God in the Bible is coherent with what my reason comes to know.
所以我认为，如果你愿意，你可以用理性来验证圣经中所给出的内容。 So I think you can use reason to verify, if you want, what's been given in the Bible.