隱形宗派（五）--- 斷了線的風箏

馬丁路德的改革，他自己是如何看呢？好像蠻後悔的。以下是他的話。

"We deserve that our Evangelicals (the followers of the new Gospel) should now be seven times worse than they were before. Because after having learnt the Gospel, we steal, tell lies, deceive, eat and drink (to excess), and practice all manner of vices." [Walch. III. 2727]

"People are now possessed with seven Devils, whereas formerly they were possessed with one Devil; the Devil now enters into the people in crowds, so that men are now more avaricious, unmerciful, impure, insolent . . . than formerly under the Pope." [Walch. XIII. 19]

. . . . "I confess, that I am much more negligent, than I was under the Pope, and there is now nowhere such an amount of earnestness under the Gospel, as was formerly seen among Monks and Priests." [Walch. IX. 1311]

福音運動所標榜的四大偏重，前面已經討論了三項，現在回顧一下。這個運動的問題是以偏概全和簡化。信德是神的恩典加上人的行動缺一不可，卻被簡化成簡單的決志禱告；耶穌的生命，死，復活，再來，成就了永恆的救恩，更彰顯了天國的屬性，而福音運動只關心個人的救恩，限定在一種赦罪的解釋；唯獨聖經的標榜，從對聖經權威的尊重退化為一種浮面的解經方式，反而離真理越來越遠。

至於最後一項偏重，傳福音導向，我只能說，福音如果是殘缺的，就只剩『傳』而已。福音派的教導好像本末倒置了。信徒的主要使命是『傳』，教會的主要使命也是『傳』，而信徒的屬靈生命也寄託在『傳』上面。『傳』被高舉到神聖的地步，而所傳福音信息卻簡化為狹隘的個人救贖，失去了耶穌天國的福音的原味。福音派習慣以『大使命』來稱呼馬太福音28：19『你們要去，使萬民作我的門徒…』且不說耶穌這段對十一個門徒的教誨到底能不能直接適用於所有基督徒，總要區分一下『傳福音』和『使做門徒』的差別吧？如果傳的福音只是『接受耶穌』，那距離做門徒還遠著呢！所謂做門徒，不是做牧師的門徒，而是做耶穌的門徒，也就是如同耶穌身邊的門徒一樣跟隨耶穌，與他同住同吃喝，像學徒一樣的學習。我們要做到這樣，耶穌又不在，唯一的辦法就是努力去具體認識耶穌，而不是憑想像來理解祂吧！祂念茲在茲的是天國，如果你對天國沒感覺，算是跟隨祂，做祂的門徒嗎？所以福音派的大使命，縱使看來成果斐然，基督徒人數增長快速，究其本質，恐怕多半是增加天國裡的稗子含量吧？

福音運動這些特點，已經背離了當初的改教精神。馬丁路德在世時就已經後悔了，但他如果看到今天福音運動的發展，恐怕就更不堪了。其實早在當初他砍斷使徒繼承教導權柄和教會傳統在解經上的權威，今天的局面就早已成定局了。新教恐怕會如脫韁的野馬，或如脫離軌道的行星，沒有下錨的船，未來會變成什麼樣子無法預料。

說來反諷，新教的一些理論家堅持新教才是正統教會，而『羅馬』天主教才是走偏的教會。他們的理論是，天主教走偏是在羅馬帝國承認教皇開始，而新教是恢復在那之前的教會教導。我是天主教徒，但坦白說我不太在意新教的朋友是如何貶低天主教，我反而希望新教真的如同他們說的，回到『羅馬』天主教之前的樣式。因為使徒繼承權柄，教會傳統的權威，和一個實存的普世教會的主張從主前第一世紀的初代教會就確立了。如果他們認為這段教會歷史是正統的主幹，要接枝回到這個主幹上，就應該重新回到使徒繼承權柄，教會傳統，和實存的普世教會的根基上。如果新教真的能夠這樣做，別管天主教是好是壞，對新教的發展，對神的普世教會的合一，都是太好太好的事。我會為這件事禱告!加入我吧！

【附錄：一些馬丁路德和加爾文的言論幫助你看清楚現在的基督教偏到那裡去了。】

加爾文對洗禮的看法，顯然不是一個形式上的宣告而已。

“….in baptism, God, regenerating us, engrafts us into the society of his church and makes us his own by adoption.”

Institutes of the Christian Religion (4.17.1)

加爾文對聖餐的看法，顯然不只是象徵性的紀念而已。

“A true and substantial partaking of the body and blood of the Lord.”

Institutes of the Christian Religion (4.17.19)

加爾文對悔改和重生（在他來說是一回事）的看法，並不像現在福音派說的決志主義，反而是強調那是一個漸進的過程。

Therefore, in a word, I interpret repentance as regeneration, whose sole end is to restore in us the image of God . . . And indeed this restoration does not take place in one moment or one day or one year; but through continual and even slow advances God wipes out in his elect the corruption of the flesh . . . In order to reach this goal, God assigns to them a race of repentance, which they are to run throughout their lives (Institutes 3.3.8).

加爾文闡述基督的感孕，出生，受膏，受苦，天國的福音，死，復活，方方面面都顯出救恩豐富。這才是全備福音。對照福音派狹隘的個人救贖的救恩觀，就知道有天壤之別。

“We see that our whole salvation and all its parts are comprehended in Christ [Acts 4:12]. We should therefore take care not to derive the least portion of it from anywhere else. If we seek salvation, we are taught by the very name of Jesus that it is ‘of him’ [I Cor. 1:30]. If we seek any other gifts of the Spirit, they will be found in his anointing. If we seek strength, it lies in his dominion; if purity, in his conception; if gentleness, it appears in his birth. For by his birth he was made like us in all respects [Heb. 2:17] that he might learn to feel our pain [compare to Heb. 5:2]. If we seek redemption, it lies in his passion; if acquittal, in his condemnation; if remission of the curse, in his cross [Gal. 3:13]; if satisfaction, in his sacrifice; if purification, in his blood; if reconciliation, in his descent into hell; if mortification of the flesh, in his tomb; if newness of life, in his resurrection; if immortality, in the same; if inheritance of the Heavenly Kingdom, in his entrance into heaven; if protection, if security if abundant supply of all blessings, in his Kingdom; if untroubled expectation of judgment; in the power given to him to judge. In short, since rich store of every kind of good abounds in him, let us drink our fill from the fountain, and from no other.”(Institutes 2.16.18.)

馬丁路德對聖餐的看法，同樣的也是有實質的意義，絕不是單單象徵而已。

For here in the sacrament [Communion] you receive from Christ's lips the forgiveness of sins, which contains and conveys God's grace and Spirit with all his gifts, protection, defense, and power against death and the devil and all evils" (The Large Catechism -- p. 98).

馬丁路德也是認為受洗是救恩的起點，而不是什麼決志那種福音運動的產物。

"Thus we see what a great and excellent thing Baptism is, which snatches us from the jaws of the devil and makes God our own, overcomes and takes away sin and daily strengthens the new man, always remains until we pass from this present misery to eternal glory. ... As we have once obtained forgiveness of sins in Baptism ..." (The Large Catechism p. 90).

馬丁路德認為教會的聖潔是來自於對聖言和聖事的忠心。聖言和聖事就是實體普世教會的要件。新教有一部份宗派已把普世教會虛無化，恐怕也不是馬丁路德的初衷。

The church is holy even where fanatical spirits reign, if only they deny not the Word and sacraments. For if these be denied, there cannot be the church. Wherefore, wheresoever the substance of the Word and sacraments remaineth, there is the holy Church." (Galatians, op. cit., p. 40)

馬丁路德對聖母的尊崇，她的無罪，終身童貞，都是肯定的。現在這些馬丁路德的跟隨者盲目批評天主教，不知道他們其實是在批評馬丁路德。

One should honor Mary as she herself wished and as she expressed it in the Magnificat. She praised God for his deeds. How then can we praise her? The true honor of Mary is the honor of God, the praise of God's grace . . . Mary is nothing for the sake of herself, but for the sake of Christ . . . Mary does not wish that we come to her, but through her to God. (Explanation of the Magnificat, 1521).

It is a sweet and pious belief that the infusion of Mary's soul was effected without original sin; so that in the very infusion of her soul she was also purified from original sin and adorned with God's gifts, receiving a pure soul infused by God; thus from the first moment she began to live she was free from all sin" (Sermon: "On the Day of the Conception of the Mother of God," 1527).

Christ . . . was the only Son of Mary, and the Virgin Mary bore no children besides Him . . . I am inclined to agree with those who declare that 'brothers' really mean 'cousins' here, for Holy Writ and the Jews always call cousins brothers. {Pelikan, ibid., v.22:214-15 / Sermons on John, chaps. 1-4 (1539) }