二零二一年三月二十一日主日講道後感

 

    對於今天的講題，我有點感想。

    不少人都有這樣的誤會，認為大凡在教會中事奉的人，都是上帝揀選出來的人。只是我們知道，當上帝於創世時，給予人類有管理天地的權柄時，人類社會就基本上是又人類建構而成的。當我在熱衷於神學的那幾年，常常聽到：不可把責任推卸給上帝的言論。按着成功神學看，信耶穌理應給你一個好的成就；若果你得不到好的成就，那就揭示你的信仰出了什麼問題。遵循這樣的思維，若你因為給教會、牧者接納而成為事奉人員，就可以證明你為上帝揀選，而當上這職位，那就是成功神學的思維。

    事奉人員給接納，可以是基於一貫的教會文化與原則；也可以基於無知、未受神學訓練的會眾、堂位、教會中的熱心份子，你一言、我一句，胡亂地決定出來的。許多時候，不會看重神學、能力、心志，卻只重於關係。但是，真正上帝的揀選，並不是一定遵循一貫的僵化原則，或眾人不知是否無知的決定。換言之，這裏該有一個真正上帝的揀選，教會及牧者的責任是盡力去找到上帝的揀選。我們不能說，教會及牧者所揀選的，就是上帝的揀選。更不能說會眾投票出來的，就是上帝的揀選。因此，在揀選事奉者的事上，最重要的是尋求出上帝的心意，盡力選到上帝所揀選的人。當大家作出決定後，也不能定義那些不被你揀選的人，不是上帝的揀選。只是，上帝在你回天家述職時，要審問你，為何作出錯誤的揀選？小心！

    那麼！怎麼辦呢？我們如何可以完全知道上帝的心意呢？

    根據既已未已的原則，我們已擁有真理，但並未完全擁有真理。這就是我所要提及的專業主義。牧師為何要唸神學，就是要得到這樣的既已未已的真理。我們不能僅遵循傳統，我們不能僅遵循眾議，堅持專業才是處理實務的意識形態。 這樣做，牧者總算是盡了一己之責任。只是仍須謙虛地承認，盡了專業所作的揀選，仍有選不中上帝心意的可能。若出了什麼亂子，都是自己的錯，不是上帝的錯。但是，若果牧者輕率並且沒有遵循專業行事，那就是可讓上帝追究的失職。敬請謹慎！

二零二一年三月二十一日下午三時二十六分啟筆著作

二零二一年三月二十一日下午五時正完成著作

 

Reflection after Worship on Sunday, March 21, 2021

Dear Pastor xxx,

I have some reflections would like to share with you about the topic today.

Many people have such a misunderstanding that everyone who serves in a church is chosen by the God. As human society was basically social constructed by mankind when the God gave mankind the authority to manage the world at the beginning of the creation of the world. For those years I was passionate in theology, I often heard the words: ‘Do not shirk the responsibility to the God’. According to the theology of prosperity, believing in Jesus should give you a good achievement; if you do not get a good achievement, then it will reveal that there is something wrong in your faith. Following this mindset, if you become a minister because you are accepted by a church and pastors, it can prove that you are chosen by the God, it is the will of the God to allow you to take up this position. That is the mindset of prosperity theology.

Acceptance as a minister can be based on the traditional church culture and principles; it can also be based on the ignorance of the untrained congregation, the church leaders, and the enthusiastic members in a church. They may deliver a discursive decision. In many cases of minster selection, theology, ability, and their ambition are not valued, but only the relationship is emphasised. However, the true choice of the God does not necessarily follow a traditional rigid principle, or a decision made by the people no matter they are ignorant or not. In other words, there should be a true choice of the God, and the responsibility of the churches and the pastors is to try their best to find the choice of the God out. We cannot say that the choice of the churches and the pastors is the choice of the God. Do not say that what the congregation voted is the God's choice. Therefore, the most important thing in choosing the servants is to seek out the God's will and try our best to choose those whom the God chooses. After the minster has be selected, you cannot define those who are not chosen by you are not chosen by the God. However, the God will question you when you return to the heavenly home to report on your work, ‘why did you make the wrong choice?’ Be careful!

Then! What can we do? How can we fully know the God's will?

According to the ‘already but not yet’ principle, we already have the truth, but we do not have the truth completely. This is the professionalism I want to promote. Why a pastor wants to study theology? It is to get only an unfinished truth. We cannot just follow tradition, we cannot just follow public opinion, insisting on professionalism is the ideology for handling practical affairs. In doing so, the pastor has finally fulfilled his own responsibility. However, we still have to humbly admit that there is still the possibility of not choosing the God's will even fulfil all the professional steps. If something goes wrong, it is my own fault, not the God's fault. However, if the lazy pastor is rash and does not follow professional conduct, it is a negligence that can be held accountable by the God. Please be cautious!

留言

發佈留言

此網誌的熱門文章

我爸爸愛看報 My father liked to read newspapers

 DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18626.71366     我爸爸愛看報，報紙教懂他很多知識，使他無所不知。只是，他身邊也有很多人擁有豐富知識。但是，我爸爸總是不聽他們。尤其是那些擁有豐富知識的人是他的親人、孩子。     我爸爸不是一個愛在群體中聊天的人，他不會參與社會建構。喜歡參與社會建構的，冒犯地說句：以女性為多。正所謂：三個女人一個墟。只是，當爸爸自主地拿起一份報紙閱讀時，他那一刻作為社會的一部份，參與了知識的創造。於是，爸爸在建構着社會。他不會接受人家的意見，而接受報紙的意見，不在乎知識的對錯，而在於他在獲得知識時的社會地位。     所以，社會上出現一個現象。大家不是問：什麼是對？什麼是錯？而是誰對？誰錯？ My father liked to read newspapers. The newspapers taught him a lot of knowledges and made him know everything. There were many people who were rich in knowledges live with him, my father seldom listened to them. Especially for those with rich knowledges were his relatives or children. My father was not a person who liked to chat in groups, he seldom participated in social construction. Those who like to participate in social construction, offensively saying, most likely are women. As the idiom say, ‘three women is a market’. However, when Dad picked up a newspaper to read it voluntarily, he participated, as a ...
閱讀更多

多重意識形態

      一般上，我若想上載上 Researchgate 的文章，都以英語或中英雙語撰寫的。但就這篇文章，我只以中文撰寫，因為我只想跟我的國家及同族社會分享我在這方面的構思與理論。事實上，我有點擔心，因為華人社會沒有接受新事物的胸襟。所以，我現在多以英語發表思想。只是，我在這方面所關心的是中國國家及社群，我所用的語言就只可以用中文。希望我的同胞能耐心理解，不要讓我老是以英語發表，再轉換回中文，大家才給我一點向大家表述的機會。這樣認為外國貨才是好的思維，本源於僵化的結構主義 ── 我以下要細談的其中一個理論。     其實這課題，可以很簡單，也可以很專業。讓我先來一個簡單版本，日後再補上一個從社會本體論角度進行的分析。     社會從來不是一式化的，所以社會結構，也不用一定是，全社會皆是一個模式的。我們知道，在中國舊有社會中，出現了一個長達數千年的，家國同構的，超穩定結構。這一個結構，是社會結構中的奇葩。若循結構主義角度看，每個社會都有一個大至上的結構，依循此結構，大至上可以預測社會的運作與變化。只是如中國舊社會那種超穩定結構，就少之又少。換言之，一般上，社會的結構不會牢固得那麼要命，家國可以不同構。     不用進行什麼多餘的所謂研究，我們每個人都觀察得到，我們的社會，會按各小型群體而出現不同的社會形態。正如我們每個人都是社會的一員，也同時是某一家庭的成員。我們到社會去，想買一個橙要付錢，老闆要員工給他工作要付薪金，一班同事外出用饍也多是各付各一份的。但是，若在一個家庭中，若小兒子要付錢才可從雪櫃中取一個橙，要付錢媽媽才給他造飯，一家外出用饍每個小朋友都要付他們自己的一份，那一個恐怕是一個破碎家庭了。說什麼一國兩制不可行？原來我們的社會，從來就是同時是資本主義及共產主義的一國兩制。若循另一角度看，一個不是一國兩制的社會，才是人格分裂的變態社會。     當然，在今天中國跟香港的一國兩制安排，並不是這個意思。只是，我們的社會基本上是可容納多元社會結構的；並且可以說，若不維持多元社會結構，社會不能持續。職場上的運作主要是根據 reward theory 。老闆給了你錢，你給他工作，完全是等價交換。...
閱讀更多

Integrative Study of Structuralism, Social Constructionism, Realism and Professionalism

          This is the declaration of my project for studying the captioned four sociological theories in an integrative mode. It may not the usual way in sociological study that used to proof particular theory or apply theories. My approach is to apprehend the society in different angles through the eyes of different sociological theories. I treat every sociological theory as an angle to apprehend the society. Although, sociological theory is created to explain the society, some phenomena may be better to be understood by the view of other sociological theory. I apply sociological theories as a tool to apprehend the society and as a way to treat the society.         I choose Structuralism and Social Constructionism as the eyes to apprehend the society because it is the best arrangement to reveal the situation of China and Chinese society. Chinese society had been long suffering from its Ultra Stable Social Stru...
閱讀更多