"原罪"释疑

在基督教教义中,"罪"和"原罪"的思想在中国历来是被误解较多的两个概念.中国文化的语境下,"罪"是与对法律的违反和道德上的"恶"紧密关联在一起的,这样的理解与基督教对"罪"的理解有很大的距离.也正因如此,中国人对"原罪"的理解则更为困难.本文试图借助基督教思想史上对"罪"和"原罪"问题的一些很有价值的论述,对基督教语境下"罪"和"原罪"的含义进行辨析,以区分它们与中国社会和文化对"罪"的理解之不同,从而尽可能地消除国人对基督教所讲的"罪",特别是"原罪"的普遍曲解.     

The original sin of proof-theoretic semantics

Proof-theoretic semantics is an alternative to model-theoretic semantics. It aims at explaining the meaning of the logical constants in terms of the inference rules that govern their behaviour in proofs. We argue that this must be construed as the task of explaining these meanings relative to a logic, i.e., to a consequence relation. Alas, there is no agreed set of properties that a relation must have in order to qualify as a consequence relation. Moreover, the association of a consequence relation to a logical calculus is not as straightforward as it may seem. We show that these facts are problematic for the proof-theoretic project but the problems can be solved. Our thesis is that the consequence relation relevant for proof-theoretic semantics is the one given by the sequent-to-sequent derivability relation in Gentzen systems.

     

The original risk: overtheologizing ethics and undertheologizing sin.

The project of articulating a theological ethics on the basis of liturgical anthropology is bound to fail if the necessary consequence is that one has to quit the forum of critical modern rationality. The risk of Engelhardt's approach is to limit rationality to a narrow vision of reason. Sin is not to be understood as the negation of human holiness, but as the negation of divine holiness. The only way to renew theological ethics is to understand sin as the anthropological and ethical expression of the biblical message of the justification by faith only. Sin is therefore a secondary category, which can only by interpreted in light of the positive manifestation of liberation, justification, and grace. The central issue of Christian ethics is not ritual purity or morality, but experience, confession and recognition of our own injustice in our dealing with God and men.     

Retributive karma and the problem of blaming the victim

A defining feature of retributive conceptions of karma is their regarding of suffering or misfortune as consequent upon sins committed in previous lives. Some critical non-believers in karma take offence at this view, considering it to involve unjustly blaming the victim. Defenders of the view demur, and argue that a belief in retributive karma in fact provides a motivation for benevolent action. This article elucidates the debate, showing that its depth is such that it is best characterized as a disagreement in form of life (in Wittgenstein’s sense) rather than as a disagreement in opinions. Also briefly discussed is an example of a non-retributive form that belief in karma and reincarnation can take.     

Bioethics and sin.

On the basis of a historical reconstruction of the stages through which the Christian notion of sin took shape in Protestantism, the significance of this term for modern bioethics is derived from its opposition to a holiness of God and his creatures, which in turn translates into the secular moral concept of dignity. This dignity imposes obligations to respect and to relationships that are sustained by faithfulness and trust. In being based on the gratuitousness of God's grace, such relationships preclude attempts at instrumentalization, denial of singularity, and subjection to market forces. Accordingly, reproductive cloning as well as exposing medicine to economical considerations can be classified as sinful. The difference between sinful acts and humans' sinful state furthermore permits to address the problems of evil and misfortune in the world, and to acknowledge humans' responsibility for the threats to humanity entailed by those ills. While the Christian faith relies on God's mercy, it also imposes the task of following Christ by fighting against evil and misfortune.     

Investing in karma: when wanting promotes helping

People often face outcomes of important events that are beyond their personal control, such as when they wait for an acceptance letter, job offer, or medical test results. We suggest that when wanting and uncertainty are high and personal control is lacking, people may be more likely to help others, as if they can encourage fate's favor by doing good deeds proactively. Four experiments support this karmic-investment hypothesis. When people want an outcome over which they have little control, their donations of time and money increase (Experiments 1 and 2), but their participation in other rewarding activities does not (Experiment 1b). In addition, at a job fair, job seekers who feel the process is outside (vs. within) their control make more generous pledges to charities (Experiment 3). Finally, karmic investments increase optimism about a desired outcome (Experiment 4). We conclude by discussing the role of personal control and magical beliefs in this phenomenon.     

Freedom in responsibility: on the relevance of "sin" as a hermeneutic guiding principle in bioethical decision making.

This essay deals with questions of responsibility concerning technology, in particular, gene technology and the special problem of research on embryos. I raise issues concerning the extent of humans' authority to act and the limits of human freedom. In what way is that freedom given, and what kind of responsibility results from it? By discussing various concepts of human freedom in the tradition of European philosophy, as juxtaposed to the Protestant understanding of freedom, this essay discusses the restricting limits, and the obligation to take responsibility. It will turn out that the question concerning freedom cannot be answered without understanding what being human involves. From a Christian perspective, this implies that the foundational relationship between human freedom and sin will be central to an assessment of the human ability to take responsibility. By obliterating the limits of human freedom, sin jeopardizes the very essence of that freedom. The project of taking into account the sinful state of the human condition thus aims at developing a realistic picture of the authority of humans in action, even in view of the human tasks of promoting science and research.     

Psychotherapy,sin, and mental health

The authors contend that there are important consistencies between the Judeo-Christian tradition and psychotherapy. Empirical findings suggesting a weak correlation between religiosity and mental health are discussed in terms of there being both healthy and unhealthy aspects of religion. The crucial balance may involve the shame engendered via the awareness of sin vs. the assurance of ultimate acceptance or grace. Also discussed are issues that arise when psychiatry and religion seemingly conflict.     

When confessing sin feels good

This paper draws on a qualitative study of how young people engaged in two youth ministries in the Church of Norway reflect on sin and shame in relation to their existential dilemmas . The authors analyze this practice through the lens of Hartmut Rosa's concept of resonance, arguing that there is consonance between how young people in the study express shame and the Lutheran understanding of sin as being curved in on oneself. Both sin and shame prevent the subject from being open to the world, thus constituting resistance to resonance. Yet, the practice of confessing sin may be a remedy to this closing in on oneself, as confession affords a resonant space, countering feelings of existential inadequacy caused by both sin and shame. Bringing the concept of vulnerability into the discussion, the paper further argues that confessing sin may prove healing and liberating also for experiences of shame as long as it does not violate the subject's ability to speak with her own voice or involve harmful god-images or harmful power dynamics.     

基督教"原罪"之佛学阐释

本文尝试从佛教思想角度阐释基督教之"原罪".从"原罪"的产生来看,人类的苦难来自于始祖所犯的过错,而这种过错从佛学角度来看既是一种"我执"的产生,即"无明".而从"罪"的内涵来分析,"罪"这个世界所有人都具有的一种非本体性的状态,是人本来真实、清净、圆满状态的扭曲和破坏,是人对自己真实"本性"的背离.     

Death,sin, and God's judgment

Grief is difficult for everyone, including the professional. And yet resolving grief is necessary for life to be comfortable and productive. This paper looks at the story of a young man and how unresolved grief, inappropriate guilt, and uncontrollable despair colored every phase of his life. It also demonstrates the tragedy when grief is allowed to remain in denial and resolution comes too late.     

A kinky doctrine of sin

ABSTRACT

Religious and secular groups alike have long marginalized those who practice “kinky sex.” These discourses of bodily control have been deconstructed and proven faulty. However, this proposal goes further than mere deconstruction and exposes the gaping hole under this new deconstruction: what does a doctrine of sin look like for kink practitioners? This gaping hole is lubed and ready to be filled. According to a kinky doctrine, sin is violating consent and obstructing escape, the failure to accept limits, and the external essentialism of identity. This kinky theology of sin will not only be useful for members of the kink community but also for individuals from a wide range of identities and practices.     

Life history, sin, and disease.

On the basis of experiences in pastoral hospital care, the relationship between disease, sin, and guilt in the life of patients is explored. Against the disregard of this subject in medicine, and even in most of pastoral care, it is argued that patients' interest requires that their hidden or manifest questions be addressed, rather than their being exposed to efforts at "helping" through mere attempts at "debt clearance." Only by openly confronting sin and guilt can the patient be taken seriously in his role as subject of his disease. Theological and anthropological background considerations revealing the essence of sin as a disruption or even destruction of the Divine gift of life in its realization through a lived relationship to God and other humans are offered as evidence for this claim.     

Insanity and responsibility

This paper attempts to set forth, in the context of Anglo‐U.S. criminal law, the meaning of the concept of insanity, its necessary relation to absence of responsibility, and its bearing on some relevant psychiatric concepts and legal controversies. Irrationality is a distinctive and necessary (but not sufficient) condition for insanity. Irrationality consists in failure even to grasp the relevance of what is ‘essentially’ relevant. To that extent there obviously can be no responsibility. A mental makeup which renders one (who would not normally be so) substantially incapable of rational conduct constitutes insanity, and in that respect renders the person non‐responsible. Much more broadly and roughly speaking, the mind that is ill is the mind that is irrational (and hence in that respect non‐responsible).