这些年来，我发现许多从支持堕胎转而成为反对堕胎的人最终都皈依了公教。 Over the years, I've noticed that many people who convert to being pro-life end up becoming Catholic.
这包括前堕胎医生伯纳德·纳森森和前计划生育协会主任艾比·约翰逊。 These include people like former abortionist Bernard Nathanson and former Planned Parenthood director Abby Johnson.
利拉·萝丝在青少年时期以福音派基督徒身份发起现场行动，但后来改宗加入了公教会。 Lila Rose started live action as a teenager when she was an evangelical, but then she later converted to Catholicism.
当然更有许多原本无宗教信仰、甚至属于新教背景 的人士，经年参与反堕胎运动后最终归信公教。 And of course, there are many people who were non-religious or even Protestant and became Catholic after spending years in the pro-life movement.
在今天的节目中，我将探讨他们改宗的原因——其中某些动机实 在应当促使所有反对堕胎者，都来省思公教特有的道德世界观。 In today's episode, I'm going to examine those reasons they convert, some of which should really move all pro-lifers to consider the moral worldview that is unique to Catholicism.
不过在开始之前，请诸位点击「喜欢」按钮并订 阅本频道，以助我们拓展影响力接触更多观众。 But before we do that, I hope I can move you to hit the like button and subscribe to our channel so you can help it grow and reach a lot more people.
我必须承认，这些改宗案例多数产生于社会因素。 Now, I admit that in many cases, these conversions come about because of social reasons.
公教徒数十年来在反堕胎运动中占据了不成比例的主导地位。 Catholics have been overrepresented in the pro-life movement for decades.
因此非公教人士投身此运动时，视公教义理为其根基信仰体系也就不足为奇。 And so it's not surprising that non-Catholics entering the pro-life movement may see Catholicism as a foundational belief system within it.
生命之大学生联盟主席克莉丝汀·霍金斯谈及改宗公教时曾说：『正如我在 关于支持堕胎新教徒的节目中所展示的——我会将链接附在下方说明栏—— 公教会通过成立全国生命权委员会等方式，率先在美国发起了反堕胎运动』 Kristen Hawkins, the president of Students for Life, said of her conversion to Catholicism, quote, As I showed in my episode about pro-choice Protestants, which I'll link in the description below, The Catholic Church started the pro-life movement in the United States through things like founding the National Right to Life Committee.
甚至直到1980年代中期，美南浸信会等主要新教保守团体仍持支持堕胎立场。 Major conservative Protestant bodies like the Southern Baptist Convention even had pro-choice views until the mid-1980s.
公教会的圣统制度所提供的动员机制，在新教各宗派中也难以见到同等力度。 The hierarchy of the Catholic Church also provides a way to mobilize Catholic pro-life activists that's not as robust in other Protestant denominations.
最后，若你参与基层反堕胎行动——比如在堕胎诊所 外祈祷——常会发现身旁手执玫瑰经诵念的公教徒。 Finally, if you get involved with grassroots pro-life activism, like praying outside of abortion facilities, you'll often find that people praying next to you are Catholics reciting the rosary.
因此其中一个答案颇为简单。 So, one answer is a bit simple.
反堕胎运动中有大量公教徒存在，因此新教徒参与者往往 会经由自己敬佩的生命捍卫战友，逐渐接触到公教信仰。 There are a lot of Catholics in the pro-life movement, so Protestants who get involved are likely to be introduced to Catholicism by people they already admire as comrades in the fight for life.
相较对立情境，他们在这种背景下对了解此信仰更为开放。 And so, they're more open to learning about the faith than if it were in a more adversarial context.
但超越社会因素，我相信当思考范围不局限于堕胎，延伸到人类生命每个阶段 、乃至尚未成形之初应如何对待时，更深层的神学与哲学动因便彰显出来。 But beyond the social reason, I think there's a deeper theological and philosophical reason that becomes apparent when we start thinking not just about abortion, but how we should treat human beings at every moment of their lives, and even how we should treat them before they come into existence.
这问题源自于叩问：未出生的孩子享有多少权利？ And this comes from asking the question, how many rights do unborn children have?
反对堕胎者有时误认为胎儿在出生前仅享有一项权利——生存权。 Pro-lifers sometimes mistakenly think that the unborn only have one right before they're born, the right to life.
他们常狭隘地将其解读为单纯的免于被杀权利。 And they often interpret that right very narrowly, as simply the right to not be killed.
但这类论点正让支持堕胎者有机可乘——后者会说：『姑且同意胎儿是人罢』 But this leaves them open to pro-choicers who say, I'll agree for the sake of the argument that a fetus is a person.
『或许他们拥有生存权，却不享有维生仪器使用权』 They may have a right to life, but they don't have a right to life support.
按这等逻辑，犹如医院里濒死的病人即使与我肾脏完美匹配，也 无权要求捐献；未出生的孩子同样无权藉他人躯体维持生命。 According to these pro-choicers, just as a dying patient in a hospital doesn't have the right to my kidney, even if it happens to be a perfect match, unborn children don't have a right to use someone else's body to stay alive.
此种诡辩之所以失败，正因支持堕胎者本质上不承认未出生的孩子是拥有生存权的人。 But this argument doesn't work because the pro-choicer is not granting that the unborn child is a real person with a right to life.
若孩子无权享有维持生命唯一所需之物——母亲的躯体——其生存权岂非虚妄？ How can that child have a right to life if they don't have the right to the one and only thing that they need in order to have a life, their mother's body?
我的肾脏是为我的身体所造，故他人均无权索要。 My kidneys were made for my body, so no one else has a right to them.
但子宫之用途何在？ But what is the purpose of the uterus?
此器究竟为谁而造？ For whom was it made?
成年人独处经年，通常体现了我们尊重其生存权。 If you leave adults alone for a long time, you generally respect their right to life.
幼童若被长期弃置，则常构成对其生存权的侵犯。 But if you leave small children alone for a long time, you often violate their right to life.
这等于是杀害他们。 You kill them.
某项权利既可要求他人不干涉，亦可迫使他人施以援手。 A right can make someone leave you alone, but it can also force someone else to help you.
众多支持堕胎者甚至认为，堕胎权可强行要求公教医院实施堕胎。 Many pro-choicers even think that the right to abortion can force Catholic hospitals to provide abortion.
但至少在孩童身上，生存权内涵包括获得他人——主要是其父母——援助的权利。 But at least with small children, the right to life includes the right to assistance from other people, primarily the child's parents.
生命伦理学家卡特·斯尼德写道：「我们道成肉身 的特性，将我们置于特定的人际关系脉络中。」 Bioethicist O. Carter Sneed writes the following, ...our embodiment situates us in a particular relationship to one another.
「由此衍生出救助弱势者——尤其是残障者、年长者及孩童——的道德责任。」 from which emerge obligations to come to the aid of vulnerable others, including especially the disabled, the elderly, and children.
斯尼德指出，任何罔顾此道成肉身必要性的法律，「既无法认知这些 责任，也使人类共同体中最弱小无助者陷入隐形且无防卫的境地」。 Sneed says a law that doesn't take into account our necessary embodiment, quote, fails to recognize these obligations and leaves the weakest and most vulnerable members of the human community invisible and unprotected.
胎儿既是位格生命，其所拥有的权利便不仅止于不受侵扰。 Since unborn children are persons, they have the right not just to be left alone.
事实上，弃置他们的做法实则侵犯了生存权。 In fact, leaving them alone violates the right to life.
反而他们有权获得父母——母亲与父亲——的哺育。 Rather, they have a right to be cared for by their mother and their father.
未出生的孩子享有迫使父母为其牺牲的权利——不论是父亲的职场牺牲， 或是母亲使用原本就被设计来养育孩童的身体器官而作出的解剖性牺牲。 Unborn children have a right that compels their parents to make sacrifices for them, be it a father's occupational sacrifice or a mother's anatomical sacrifice, using the bodily organs designed for sustaining these children.
但让我们更深一层思考。 But let's go deeper.
若胎儿确是位格生命，其所拥有的权利绝不限于被维持存活。 If the unborn truly are persons, then they have more than just the right to be kept alive.
他们有权被爱。 They have the right to be loved.
他们有权与父建立关系。 They have the right to a relationship with their parents.
若他们无权要求与父母建立关系，那么父母随时能 以任何原因——甚或无端——将子女抛弃给国家。 If they didn't have a right to a relationship with their parents, then parents could abandon their children to the state whenever they felt like it, for any reason or no reason at all.
但我们内心深知这是错误的。 But deep down, we know that's wrong.
只有当父母确实无力扶养时，才应被准许放弃监护权。 Parents should only be allowed to relinquish custody of their children if they are unfit to care for their children.
2008年内布拉斯加州通过安全港法，却因允许父母合法遗弃子女而引发意外后果。 In 2008, the state of Nebraska faced the unintended consequences of having a safe haven law that allowed parents to legally abandon their children.
这项法律却未明确定义『孩童』的年龄范围。 But the law did not define what a child was.
结果外州父母带着多达17岁的子女前来遗弃给州政府官员。 As a result, parents came from out of state with children as old as 17 years of age in order to abandon them to state officials.
短短三月间内布拉斯加境内遭遗弃的儿童达34名，来自七个州。 In just three months, 34 children from seven states were abandoned in Nebraska.
其中28人超过10岁，仅有1名是婴儿。 28 of them were older than 10. Only one was an infant.
该法初衷始终是为保护新生儿免遭即刻伤害。 And the intent of the law was always the protection of newborns and immediate danger of being harmed.
该州立法者现正考虑修法，将安全港适用范围限缩至出生三日内的婴儿。 Nebraska lawmakers are now considering whether to change state law and limit safe havens to infants up to three days old.
安全港法并未否定孩童享有不被父母遗弃的权利这一基本理念。 Safe haven laws do not contradict the view that children have a right to not be abandoned by their parents.
有些案例中父母确实无力承担养育责任。 In some cases, their parents are truly unfit to care for them.
但某些情形下，这些法律是社会对次恶的容忍，旨在防止更严重的杀婴行为之盛行。 But in other cases, these laws are a social toleration that tries to prevent the greater evil of infanticide.
安全港制度可溯至中世纪——教宗英诺森三世于119 8年颁令意大利设置弃婴轮装置，以杜绝杀婴惨剧。 Safe havens go back to the Middle Ages, where Pope Innocent III decreed in 1198 that foundling wheels be installed in Italy to prevent incidents of infanticide.
综上，孩童所拥有的绝不仅止于生存权。 So to summarize, children have more than just a right to life.
他们有权被爱。 They have a right to love.
他们有权与亲生父母建立关系。 They have a right to a relationship with their biological parents.
且父母不可仅因不愿抚养而遗弃子女。 and their parents cannot abandon them simply because they no longer want to raise them.
但若子女享有被父母所爱的权利，则必然引申出其他诸多权责。 But if children have a right to be loved by their parents, then this entails that these children have a right to many other things.
例如，孩童本应是婚姻之爱的果实，而非淫乱、卖淫、通奸或强暴等罪恶行径的产物。 For example, children have the right to come into existence as the fruit of marital love and not as the end result of an evil like fornication, prostitution, adultery, or rape.
诚然以此等恶行诞育的孩童，仍具位格尊严。 Obviously, children who come into existence through those evil means are still persons with human dignity.
但此事实无法改变那些孕育手段本身的罪恶本质。 But that doesn't change the fact that it was wrong to engage in those acts that bring children into existence by those means.
此刻若存新教背景者，或许在认同上述观点之余仍疑惑：为何必须改宗公教？ Now, so far, many Protestants would agree with what I've said, and they would wonder, well, why should they be Catholic?
他们已然完全认同所有这些观点。 They just already agree with all of that.
请再循此推论脉络前行。 But once again, follow the line of reasoning.
作为具体化的位格存在——能要求他人承担责任——孩童更应享有哪些权利？ What else do children, in virtue of being embodied persons who can obligate others, what else do they have a right to?
如此推导时，公教特有的生命伦理观方能显出内在逻辑之完满。 When you think in this way, distinctly Catholic bioethics start to make sense.
例如，若胎儿无权寄居母体，那么怀孕母亲选择以人造子宫抚养胎儿——仅仅因不愿 承受妊娠艰辛——就合乎道德，正如2023年电影《掌爪世代》所呈现的情节。 For example, if children did not have the right to reside in their mother's body, then there would be nothing wrong with a pregnant mother choosing to raise her baby in an artificial womb, simply because she didn't want to undergo the difficulties of pregnancy, as can be seen in the 2023 film The Paw Generation.
但众多基督徒会视此乃母职的肆意推卸。 But many Christians would consider this a selfish abdication of motherhood.
无需科幻情节便知，只要未直接堕胎，不少基督徒对使用卵 子捐赠、精子捐赠及代孕母亲这类畸形实践同样习以为常。 But you don't need science fiction to see that many Christians see nothing wrong with the grotesque practice of using egg donors, sperm donors, and gestational surrogates in order to birth children as long as abortion isn't directly involved.
教宗方济各近日呼吁全球禁止代孕行为。 Pope Francis has recently called for a global ban on gestational surrogacy.
但我发现许多新教徒虽认为此等行为过错且属犯罪，却难以阐明有偶夫妇使 用代孕或通过试管婴儿技术诞育生命（若过剩胚胎未被毁弃）为何罪恶。 But I find many Protestants see that this is wrong and it's sinful, but they have a hard time articulating why it would be sinful for a married couple to use a gestational surrogate or to create a baby through IVF if the surplus embryos are not destroyed.
可以说，胚胎期的人类理应享有亲母的孕育权。 Now, you could say embryonic human beings have the right to be mothered.
不应沦为工业化制品。 Not manufactured.
但若新教徒认为圣经未明令谴责避孕，故该行为无罪，则经卷何 以能清晰无误地谴责使徒时代闻所未闻的代孕等现代之恶呢？ But if Protestants think the Bible doesn't clearly condemn contraception, and so contraception is not sinful, how could the Bible be clear enough for them to believe that it condemned modern evils like gestational surrogacy that the apostolic authors would have had no idea about?
若新教徒认同孩童应是婚姻行为之结晶，在其母体安全受 育是天赋权利，则多数人或许能接受反对避孕的理据。 If a Protestant believes children have the right to come into existence within the safety of their mother's bodies as the fruit of the marital act, then many of them may also be open to an argument against contraception.
具体而言：孩童应是上帝自由颁赠的礼物，而非突破避孕防线入侵母体的『侵入者』。 Specifically, the argument that children have the right to come into existence as a freely received gift from God, and not to come into existence as an invader who managed to overcome birth control security defenses and infiltrate their mother's womb.
事实上，生命伦理学家威廉·梅在其著作《公教生命伦理学与生命的恩赐》中指出 ：避孕措施之所以错误，因其表达出对未来子女充满恶意且反生命的敌视姿态。 In fact, the bioethicist William E. May argues in his book, Catholic Bioethics and the Gift of Life, that contraception is wrong because it expresses an evil, anti-life attitude toward a couple's future children.
他写道：「避孕的本质正是选择阻挠新生命的肇始—— 这项反生命的行为，彰显的乃是违抗生命的意志。」 He writes, Since contraception is specified precisely by the choice to impede the beginning of a new human life, it is an anti-life kind of act, one expressing a contra-life will.
正因避孕根植于违抗生命的意愿，历代基督教作者才视其等同谋杀——如先前所述。 It is precisely because contraception is specified by a contra-life will that it was, as we saw earlier, regarded for centuries as analogous to homicide by Christian writers.
避孕总归是严重错误，因其乃有意识地选择实行损伤 、摧毁或妨碍人类生命良善的行径，违背道德之极。 Contraception is always seriously wrong because it is always gravely immoral to adopt by choice the proposal to damage, destroy, or impede the good of human life.
或许有人会反驳说自然计划生育法同样阻挠生命良善，但此说虚妄。 Now, one might object that natural family planning also impedes the good of life, but that's not true.
避孕直接将生育力当作必须压抑的恶事加以攻击。 Contraception directly attacks fertility as a bad thing that must be suppressed.
但自然计划生育法则仅容许配偶在婚姻不同阶段 ，运用神所赋予的自然生育能力的天然波动。 NFP, on the other hand, merely allows couples to use their natural, God-given, yet unequal levels of fertility at different times in marriage.
诸多作者以婚礼为喻阐释此理。 Many authors use a wedding analogy to make this point.
试想新人与未婚夫正挑选婚期。 Imagine you and your fiancé are choosing the date to have your wedding.
若选某个周六，你确知二十位亲戚能出席。 If you pick one Saturday, you know your 20 cousins can attend.
若选接下来的周末，则亲戚可能因故无法参加。 But if you pick the following Saturday, you know the cousins probably can't attend because they're busy.
若自觉无力招待如此众人，夫妇或择第二周末但仍发送请柬。 If you feel like you can't host all of them, you may pick the next Saturday and still send them an invitation.
即便亲戚出乎意料现身婚礼，虽令人意外，甚至压力重重。 If they surprise you and show up to the wedding, it might be stressful.
但他们的到场仍值得庆贺。 But it's still okay that they're there.
但请设想这般情形何等伤人：您挑好了亲族得闲能参加婚 礼的周六，却又寄去谢绝函说『请远离我们的婚礼』。 But imagine how hurtful it would be if you picked the Saturday that they can come to the wedding when they're free, but you also sent them a disinvitation that said, stay out of our wedding.
「你们在这里不受欢迎。」 You aren't wanted here.
同理，当夫妇选择在妻子受孕期同房，就如在亲族能参加的周六举行婚礼。 Likewise, when a married couple is intimate during the wife's fertile time of the month, that's like having the wedding on the Saturday when the cousins can probably attend.
在女性生理周期的非受孕阶段同房，则如将婚礼定于亲族难以出席的周六。 Being intimate during the less fertile period of a woman's cycle is like hosting the wedding during the Saturday when the cousins probably cannot attend.
但使用避孕措施，好比在最适合亲族参加的周六筹办婚礼，却寄去排斥信说『莫要参与』。 But using contraception is like hosting the wedding on the best Saturday for the cousins to attend, but sending the cousins a disinvitation that says, stay out of our wedding.
或对已婚配偶而言：『勿要介入我们借由身体重申婚誓的亲密行为』。 Or for married couples, stay out of our bodily renewal of the wedding vows and the marital act.
「你在此不受待见。」 You aren't wanted here.
总之，本集目的不在于最终论断避孕、试管婴儿等反 生命行为的错谬，或验证公教生命伦理的真理性质。 So to summarize, my goal in this episode has not been to conclusively prove that contraception, IVF, and other anti-life acts are wrong, or that Catholic bioethics is true.
我只想指出自己观察到的现象——许多新教徒在长期接触公教群体后，开 始深思一个问题：如何尊重胎儿所拥有的每项权利，而不仅仅是生存权？ I just want to point out something I've seen among many Protestants who spend time among Catholics and begin to deeply ponder the question, how do I respect every right an unborn child has, and not just the child's right to life?
即便新教徒迄此认同我的观点，仍可能提出这样的疑问： Although a Protestant who agrees with me so far might ask this question.
『为何不能以新教徒身份坚持拒绝试管婴儿、代孕和避孕？』 Why can't I be a Protestant who personally rejects IVF, gestational surrogacy, and contraception?
确有一些新教徒如此坚守，他们的品德令我深深钦佩。 There are some Protestants who do that, and I have a great respect for their virtue.
但有些新教徒深信，此类恶行不仅对己身或其家庭是罪恶。 But some of those Protestants believe that these evils, they aren't just evil from their perspective or for their family.
这些恶事对全人类而言皆为不义。 These things are evil for everyone.
若此言属实，何以上帝在启示给信徒的经卷中，未明示要基督徒恪守反对此类罪恶？ But if that's true, then why didn't God make this clear in the scripture that he's revealed to bind Christians to oppose these evils?
或许上帝以权威无误教导子民的方式——包含道德神学——不止于圣经文字本身。 Well, maybe God's ways of authoritatively and infallibly teaching his people, including moral theology, maybe those ways go beyond the Bible alone.
或许上帝赐予我们一个普世性、具约束性训导权的教会，能在基 督奥体遭遇代孕、人工授精、激素避孕等新问题时引导群羊。 Maybe God gave us a church with universal, binding teaching authority that can lead the body of Christ when it is faced with novel issues, things like gestational surrogacy, IVF, hormonal contraception.
这样的教会不仅提供建议，更能要求基督徒遵守自然律、尊重每人的尊严 ——从受孕那一刻直到受孕前的预备，确保生命以圣洁尊贵的方式成就。 that it can give not just suggestions to Christians, but compel them to follow the natural law and respect the dignity of every person, from when they are conceived and even before they are conceived, to make sure that they are conceived in a holy and dignified way.
希望本集对您有所启发。若想深入探讨，我推荐帕特里克·马德里 所著《被生命惊喜》，记录了反堕胎人士皈依公教的心路历程。 I hope this episode was helpful for you, and if you'd like to learn more, I recommend Patrick Madrid's book of conversions to Catholicism among pro-lifers called Surprised by Life.
关于人工授精议题，史黛芬妮·康纳斯的《科学孕育》值得参阅。 And when it comes to in vitro fertilization, check out Stephanie Gray Connors' book, Conceived by Science.
至于其他道德议题，可阅读本人与蕾拉·米勒合著的《天生如此》。 And for other moral issues, see my book with Layla Miller, Made This Way.
衷心感谢您的聆听，愿您今日蒙福。 Thank you so much, and I hope you have a very blessed day.