注册 登录  
 加关注
   显示下一条  |  关闭
温馨提示!由于新浪微博认证机制调整,您的新浪微博帐号绑定已过期,请重新绑定!立即重新绑定新浪微博》  |  关闭

守诚阁

基督徒世界观 译介圣经神学

 
 
 

日志

 
 

路德与慈运理(三):慈运理对主的晚餐的看法  

2011-06-11 23:43:00|  分类: 教会议题 |  标签: |举报 |字号 订阅

  下载LOFTER 我的照片书  |

路德与慈运理(三):慈运理对主的晚餐的看法
Luther vs. Zwingli 3: Zwingli on the Lord's Supper


作者:Trevin Wax 译者:诚之
原文链接:http://trevinwax.com/2008/02/12/luther-vs-zwingli-3-zwingli-on-the-lords-supper/
(感谢作者授权翻译 )

续前

慈运理不认为在主的晚餐中的“圣礼联合”有什么必要,因为他对圣礼有不同的看法。
Zwingli did not see the need for a “sacramental union” in the Lord’s Supper because of his modified understanding of sacraments.

根据慈运理的说法,圣礼是先前恩典的公开见证(testimony)。因此,圣礼是“圣事的记号,即属于先前赐下的恩典”。对慈运理来说,认为圣礼本身带有任何救恩的功效,是回到犹太教礼仪的洗濯,会让人认为救恩可以靠自己的努力而得到。(译按:慈运理强调圣礼只是外在的记号;北美大部分华人教会——特别是浸信会,都受这种思想所主导。)
According to Zwingli, the sacraments serve as a public testimony of a previous grace. Therefore, the sacrament is “a sign of a sacred thing, i.e. of a grace that has been given.” For Zwingli, the idea that the sacraments carry any salvific efficacy in themselves is a return to Judaism’s ceremonial washings that lead to the purchase of salvation.

路德试图修剪罗马天主教圣礼仪式的许多坏枝,慈运理则相信问题至少部分出自圣礼本身。解决罗马多余的仪式唯一合理的方法是重新解释圣礼的本质。单单修剪坏枝是不够的;连根拔起才能彻底解决问题。
Whereas Luther sought to prune the bad branches off the tree of Roman Catholic sacramentalism, Zwingli believed the problem to be rooted at least partly in sacramentalism itself. The only way to legitimately resolve Roman excess was to reinterpret the nature of the sacraments. Pruning the tree was not enough; pulling the tree up from its roots was the only action that could actually fix the problems.

慈运理把他修正后的对圣礼的认识应用到圣餐上,他确信圣餐主要的目的是宣告救恩,并增强信徒心中的信心。慈运理坚持,圣经经文教导主的晚餐只是一个记号(sign),要赋予它更多的意义,就侵犯了圣礼的本质。不过,这种顾虑并未使慈运理反对这个信念,即借着“信心的默想”(contemplation of faith),在圣餐中,基督是“属灵的同在”(spiritual presence)。
Applying his modified understanding of the sacraments to the Eucharist led Zwingli to affirm its primary purpose as the proclamation of salvation and the strengthening of faith in the hearts of believers. Zwingli insisted that the biblical text taught that the Lord’s Supper was a sign, and that to make it something more violated the nature of the sacrament. However, this caution did not keep Zwingli from strongly affirming a “spiritual presence” of Christ in the Eucharist brought by the “contemplation of faith.”

慈运理无法接受“真实的同在”,即宣称基督以祂实际的身体与圣餐同在,不受有形身体的限制。(译按:即慈运理认为基督的身体不可能无所不在。)
What Zwingli could not accept was a “real presence” that claimed Christ was present in his physical body with no visible bodily boundaries.

慈运理说:“这种由喜欢玩弄文字的人想出来的观念,即一个真实、真正的身体,却不实际,不确定、不具体地存在于一个地方,这个观念对我来说是毫无用处的。”
“I have no use for that notion of a real and true body that does not exist physically, definitely and distinctly in some place, and that sort of nonsense got up by word triflers.”

慈运理对主的晚餐的神学,不是一种新的发明,不存在于之前的教会历史。慈运理宣称,他对化质说的怀疑是当时许多人的共识,这使得他主张,神父从来就不相信有这等事,虽然“绝大多数的人都这样教导,或至少假装相信。”
Zwingli’s theology of the Lord’s Supper should not be viewed as an innovation without precedent in church history. Zwingli claimed that his doubts about transubstantiation were shared by many of his day, leading him to claim that priests did not ever believe such a thing, even though “most all have taught this or at least pretended to believe it.”

如果慈运理“真实存在”的修正教义是个新发明,他的教区成员不会如此热情地加以接纳。这种象征的看法之所以散布得很快,是因为慈运理只是对一个已经广为传播的看法大声疾呼,并赋予其合法性而已。
Had Zwingli’s modified doctrine of the “real presence” been an innovation, it would probably not have been so eagerly accepted by his parishioners. The symbolic view spread rapidly because Zwingli had given voice and legitimacy to an opinion that was already widespread.

苏黎世在1525年废除了弥撒。他们用新的敬拜礼仪来庆祝主的晚餐,用主餐台和桌布来取代祭坛。
In Zurich, the mass was abolished in 1525. The Lord’s Supper was celebrated with a new liturgy that replaced the altar with a table and tablecloth.

慈运理派遵守圣礼最突出的特色是它的简洁。由于饼与酒没有在实际上转化成基督的身体和血,虚假的典礼和浮夸的仪式就可以免了。简洁和敬畏是其特色,强调其作为纪念的本质。
The striking feature of the Zwinglian observance of the sacrament was its simplicity. Because the bread and wine were not physically transformed into Christ’s body and blood, there was no need for spurious ceremonies and pompous rituals. The occasion was marked by simplicity and reverence, with an emphasis on its nature as a memorial.

虽然慈运理否认“真实存在”,但是并没有因此忽略圣礼。这是后来几个世纪许多跟随者的特色。他看到主的晚餐有七个优点,可以证明它对基督徒生活的重要性。
Zwingli’s denial of the “real presence” did not result in the neglecting of the sacrament that would characterize many of his followers in centuries to come. He saw seven virtues in the Lord’s Supper that proved its importance for the Christian life.

首先,这是神圣的仪式,因为是基督,我们的大祭司亲自设立的。
First, it is a sacred rite because Christ the High Priest has instituted it.

其次,同领圣餐是为所已经完成的事作见证。
Secondly, Communion bears witness to something already accomplished.

第三,这个行动取代了它所代表的事。
Third, the action takes the place of the thing it signifies.

主的晚餐之所以宝贵,是因为它所代表的——与基督相通,支取力量;以及与其他圣徒相通,寻求合一。
The Lord’s Supper is valuable because of what it signifies (communion with Christ for strength and communion with others for unity).

第六,守主的晚餐会增强并巩固我们的信心。最后,它的能力来自它信守一个忠诚的誓言。
Sixth, observance of the Lord’s Supper increases and supports faith, and finally, its power is its keeping of an oath of allegiance.

下一篇
  评论这张
 
阅读(588)| 评论(0)
推荐 转载

历史上的今天

在LOFTER的更多文章

评论

<#--最新日志,群博日志--> <#--推荐日志--> <#--引用记录--> <#--博主推荐--> <#--随机阅读--> <#--首页推荐--> <#--历史上的今天--> <#--被推荐日志--> <#--上一篇,下一篇--> <#-- 热度 --> <#-- 网易新闻广告 --> <#--右边模块结构--> <#--评论模块结构--> <#--引用模块结构--> <#--博主发起的投票-->
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

页脚

网易公司版权所有 ©1997-2017