『修和聖事』可以寬恕踐踏耶穌的罪嗎？ Can Confession Absolve Stomping on Jesus?

【一牧一棧系列（V）】
『修和聖事』可以寬恕踐踏耶穌的罪嗎？（若14:1-6）

昨天默想過選擇性地聽從耶穌的訓誨，有如『舉腳踢耶穌』（若13:18b）。今天讓我們默想耶穌的著名『金句』：「我是道路、真理、生命，除非經過我，誰也不能到父那裡去」（14:6），反省信耶穌的其他形式。

昨天我們已經默想過『信耶穌』不僅包括了實行祂的訓誨（13:17），並且不可以選擇性地實行（13:18b）。今天選讀的經文更指出，『除非經過耶穌，〔否則〕誰也不能到〔天〕父那裡去』。語氣聽〔看〕來非常絕對，世上沒有捷徑、其他途徑或方法，可以與天父修好，獲得永生。只有實行耶穌教導的一條路，是『不二法門』…等等！那麼，對於從沒有聽聞過耶穌的人，例如孔子、老子和釋迦牟尼…等等，天父一定會安排耶穌以外，別的途徑與他們修好，使他們也可以認識耶穌，獲得永生。先知說：「因為我〔上主〕不喜歡任何人喪亡」（則18:32）；「因為祂〔天主〕願意所有的人都得救，並得以認識真理〔耶穌基督〕」（弟前2:4）。至於那些聽過耶穌，卻選擇拒絕耶穌的，便要為自己的選擇負上倫理責任了。至於那些取巧的、言行不一的信徒，同樣也要為自己的所作所為，負上責任。

由遠藤周作同名小說改編的電影『沉默』（1971; 2016），引發我們反省信仰耶穌的其他形式。當天主看著信徒受酷刑迫害仍默不作聲，仍沒有伸出援手的時候，有些勇敢的信徒捨命殉道，有些卻為了保命而踐踏十字架苦像。他們可算是舉腳踢耶穌，踐踏耶穌的叛徒了。
為了自衛或保衛無辜者而被迫殺人，倫理和法律會減免這些人的責任。同理，在教難時基督徒被迫選擇保命，要負上倫理責任嗎？伯多祿也是為了保命而三次否認自己的師傅，與電影『沉默』中部份日本基督徒『踏繪』，有甚麼分別呢？伯多祿流芳百世，『踏繪』的基督徒在有生之年被唾棄，受良心的責備，是應得的嗎？還是另類的殉道呢？

各位親愛的兄弟姊妹，對那些有意或無意踐踏了耶穌而內咎的人，我會這樣安慰他們：『耶穌是道路…要經過祂才可以到達天父那裡。倘若不踐踏祂，難道你在祂上面爬行到天父那裡嗎？』希望可以博得他們一笑，亞孟。
天主保祐！

---

生命恩泉
圖片鳴謝：copilot.microsoft.com

[One Shepherd One Fold Series --- V]
Can Confession Absolve Stomping on Jesus? (John 14:1-6)

Yesterday when we meditated on selectively observing Jesus’ teachings, we came to the conclusion that it is equivalent to raising one’s heel against Jesus (John 13:18b). Today, let us meditate on the famous proof-text, viz. “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6) so as to reflect on other ways to believe in Jesus.

Yesterday we meditated that “believing in Jesus” involves not only practising His teachings (13:17), but also refraining from selectively putting His teachings into practice (13:18b). More than that, the passage today points out explicitly that “Unless through Jesus, nobody can come to the Father”. The text sounds absolute. There is no other way, no other shortcut to reconcile with the Father and attain eternal life. There is only one way and no alternative … etc. Then for those who had not heard of Jesus, such as Confucius, Lao Tsu, Siddhartha Gautama … etc., the Father must have arranged other ways, other than Jesus, to reconcile them with Him, so that they might know Jesus and attain eternal life. The prophet says, “For I find no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies” (Ezekiel 18:32). God “wills everyone to be saved and come to knowledge of the truth [i.e. Jesus Christ]” (1 Timothy 2:4). As for those who have heard of Jesus but choose to reject Him, they need to bear the moral responsibilities of their choices. As for those who do not practise what they preach, they too would be held accountable for their actions.

The movie “Silence” (1971; 2016) which was based on a Japanese novel by Shusaku Endo, sheds light on other ways to believe in Jesus. When God remained silent and did nothing in view of the tortures and persecutions suffered by Christians, some courageously embraced martyrdom while some stomped on crucifixes in order to save their skins. In most people’s eyes, those who stomped on crucifixes are traitors.

When people are forced to kill out of self-defence or defence of the innocent, their moral and legal responsibilities are diminished. Similarly, when Christians are forced to choose survival during religious persecutions, are they exempted from moral responsibilities? Peter denied his own Master three times to survive. Was there any differences between Peter and those Japanese Christians who stomped on crucifixes, the Fumi-e? Peter was canonized. Do those Christians who had stomped on crucifixes deserve other people’s despise and condemnation from their own consciences for the rest of their lives? Or is it another form of martyrdom?

Beloved brethren! To those who regret stomping on Jesus deliberately or what not, I would console them, lighten their hearts in this way, “Jesus is the way … only through Him can we come to the Father. If you do not stomp on Jesus, would you rather crawl on Him to the Father?” Amen.
God bless!