《羅馬觀察家報》主筆及歷史學家露絲坦
Lucetta Scaraffia, editorial writer for L'Osservatore Romano, in October 2016. (Photo by Kasia Strek/CIRIC)
(資料來源：《十字架報國際版》，天亞社編譯)
(麥安泰 神父提供)
十字架報：教宗方濟各對「神職主義」的理解是什麼？
露絲坦：神職主義是指，神職人員擁有的權力和權威是在教友之上，而教友對神職人員擁有一種服從思維。更重要的是，它涉及一種教友必須服從和尊重神職人員的氛圍。從歷史上看，獨身制在這方面的發展擔當著非常重要的角色。事實上，這有著一層神秘的面紗，因它意味著給那些處於家庭生活以外的男性提供了威信。他們為了使自己獻身於學習和禱告，將自己與那些使他們遠離天主的日常問題保持著距離。
獨身如何使神職人員與眾不同？
早於七世紀，就有針對司鐸獨身的激烈辯論。當時，主教會議的結論認為，強制獨身可以是危險的，因為太少男性能夠度這樣的生活。然而，獨身的要求，除了是基於對性慾的擔憂外，還有經濟因素。有家庭的神父面對想要把教會財產傳給子女的誘惑。而且，難以區別教會和神父之間的財產，也會導致耗盡教會財產的風險。因此，為了確保教會的獨立性，「額我略改革（The Gregorian Reform）」向神職人員施加了獨身制。不過，此舉並非完全成功，在鄉村地區，許多神父繼續擁有家庭。而主教大多甚少探訪他們的教區；而當這些擁有家庭的神父被舉報時，主教們有時也樂意接受金錢，以作為保持沉默的報酬。
以往，這事常在德國發生，這亦解釋了，為何路德從一開始就強烈抗議這種腐敗。直到特倫多大公會議，才在這領域實行真正的「零容忍」政策，致使主教們更頻密地探訪他們的教區。然而，從那時起，神職的地位便以它跟其他教友的不同來界定。這是天主教會神職主義化的關鍵。似乎，神職人員獲得了在教友之上的權威，來換取他們的獨身。
是什麼導致這模式崩潰？
社會的世俗化挑戰神職人員的社會權威。隨著教會被邊緣化，神職人員只能繼續對那些去聖堂的人行使權威，在十九世紀這些人主要是女性。因此，世俗化伴隨教會的女性化。實際上，向女性施行這種權威是較容易的，因為女性的教育程度較低，而且她們本身已慣於在男性當權的家庭裡生活。
即使今天，我們仍然找到有女性幫助神父，並接受比神父的地位卑微。她們往往是年長的婦女，因為年輕女性已不再接受這一套。馬塞爾．戈謝（Marcel Gauchet）認為，父權制的衰落將導致教會的衰落，因為在他看來，教會是建基於父權制的。性侵事件說明神職人員的弱點。弱勢群體，首先是婦女和兒童，是他們唯一可行使權威並侵犯的。
教會可否克服神職主義？
可以的，但只能在所有問題都與教友，特別是與女性討論的情況下。而且，問題要包括性的問題。教會從未願意面對性革命，除了在神學層面，而從沒有在歷史或存在主義的層面出現過。我感到遺憾的是，身體神學往往太忽略了人的現實，尤其是女性的性慾。
[全譯文完]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[以下是原文全文]
Historian Lucetta Scaraffia, an editorial writer with L’Osservatore Romano, believes that clericalism, which began with the emergence of priestly celibacy, is now under challenge from secularization, which has ended the social authority of priests.
La Croix: What is Pope Francis’ understanding of 'clericalism?'
Lucetta Scaraffia: Clericalism refers to clerics’ having power or authority over the faithful and the state of subjection of the faithful with respect to clerics. More than anything else, it involves an atmosphere where the faithful are bound to obedience and respect for clerics. Historically, celibacy played a very significant role in the development of this respect.
In fact, there is a mysterious aspect to this because it means giving prestige to men who seem to exist outside the joys and difficulties of family life. In order to consecrate themselves to study and to prayer, they place themselves at a distance from the kind of daily problems that take them away from God.
How does celibacy make clerics men apart?
There were intense debates over priestly celibacy as early as the 7th century. At that time, councils of bishops concluded that it could be dangerous to impose it because too few men were capable of living it out. However, as well as reasons based on fear of sexuality, there were also economic reasons for the imposition of celibacy.Priests with families face the temptation of wanting to pass on church property to their children. And it becomes difficult to distinguish church property from that of the priests, leading to a risk of of dissipating the church’s goods. So, in order to preserve the church’s independence, the Gregorian Reform imposed celibacy on clerics. However, this was not always successful and in rural areas many priests continued to have families.
When they were reported, bishops, many of whom rarely visited their dioceses, were sometimes content to accept money as the price of their silence. This often happened in Germany and explains why from the very beginning Luther protested strongly against this sort of corruption. It took until the Council of Trent for a genuine policy of “zero tolerance” to be imposed in this field, resulting in more frequent visits by bishops to their dioceses.
From then on, however, the clerical state became defined by its difference from that of other faithful. This was the key to the clericalization of Catholic society. It was as if, in exchange for celibacy, the clergy had gained authority over the faithful.
What caused this model to implode?
Secularization of society challenged the social authority of the clergy. As the church became marginalized, clerics only continued to wield authority over those who went to church, who were mainly women during the 19th century. Secularization thus accompanied the feminization of the church. In fact, it was easier to impose this authority on women, who were less educated and already more used to living in families under the authority of men.
Even today, we still find women who help priests and accept positions of inferiority with respect to priests. These are often elderly women since young women no longer accept this. Marcel Gauchet believes that the decline of patriarchy will lead to the decline of the church because, in his view, it is based on patriarchy.
Sexual abuse illustrates the weakness of the clergy. Vulnerable people, including women and children in the first instance, are the only ones over whom it is possible to exercise authority and who can be abused.
Can the church overcome clericalism?
Yes, but only provided all issues are discussed with lay people, and with women in particular. And including sexual issues. The church has never wished to face up to the sexual revolution except at a theological level – never on the historical or existential levels.
I regret that the theology of the body too often ignores human reality, especially the sexuality of women.
沒有留言:
張貼留言