教宗若望保祿二世生活的慶典（一九二０∼二００五）從向萬民福傳到在萬民中福傳
The Celebration of the Life of John Paul II (1920-2005)
From Missio Ad Gentes to Missio Inter-Gentes 〈English〉
John Paul II And His ‘Christian Personalism’ 〈English〉
John Paul II: The Most Powerful Witness To The Gospel In Our Times〈English〉
達賴喇嘛對教宗若望保祿二世，為和平，各信仰間之關係之努力和心靈價值，表示欽佩
The Dalai
Lama Expresses Admiration For Pope John Paul II’s Efforts For
Peace,
Interfaith Relations,And
Spiritual Values 〈English〉
前 言
我們可敬的前任教宗若望保祿二世因他的言行充滿熱愛生命，舉世聞名，受各界人士尊重欽佩！堪稱為「時代的巨人」。
亞洲主教團協會的全人發展委員會於2005年曾在其季刊（Info on Human Development）三月至五月的刊物上專載有關教宗數篇文章，本會閱讀後深受感動，特邀請白正龍蒙席在百忙中翻譯其中四篇即教宗若望保祿二世生活的慶典（從一九二○年到二○○五年），從向萬民福傳到在萬民中福傳；若望保祿二世與他的「基督信仰之人性位格主義」；教宗若望保祿二世：我們時代最有力的福音見證人，以及達賴喇嘛對教宗若望保祿二世，為和平，各信仰間的關係之努力和其心靈價值，表示欽佩。我們謝謝白正龍蒙席。
教宗若望保祿二世生活的慶典
（一九二０∼二００五）
安東尼•羅澤修士，FSC
我們聽到過和閱讀過，過去一個月以來，有關這位偉大教宗若望保祿二世的生活的事蹟。我們把這些彙集在一起，關於他的生命和死亡並沒有太多的新聞，而是關於那些回顧他一生、他的成就和他的缺點卻有很多。我們曾經從各種不同背景的人的看法，無論是從天主教會本身以及那些其他信仰和傳統的人士之看法，我們都把它們彙集在一起。
有趣的是出現在，這一位在一般被人稱讚為改變世界以及是個世界的精神領袖的教宗，卻被認為是個在墮胎、節育（避孕）和同性戀諸議題上，以「保守價值」著稱的傳統主義者，尤其為那些在天主教內的人士所批評的，這到底是要如何才算合理呢，當其他信仰的人士，包括穆斯林（回教徒）、印度教、佛教和猶太教的信徒都大大地尊重這一個人和他所堅持的立場。他們似乎對這些議題上，都站在他（這一個人）的一邊，並肯定他人格的德能和說服力以及他靈修上的強烈堅持。這似乎是真實的事，即我們在亞洲的人需要了解成長人格與俗世精神的衝擊，因為這也與自由主義、相對主義，當然還包括物質（唯物）主義和個人主義的增長有關。如果這是教會分裂的原因，我們就需要更就近地來看這一件事情。
某些人認為，若望保祿二世作為羅馬的牧人達廿六年之久，已在教會內造成分裂，這真是件有趣的事，我們需要去了解這些分裂的理由，當整個世界包括兩百位世界領袖連同上百萬民眾一起，表現了與教會一起的這種合一的記號和精誠團結（或團結關懷）。甚至在某些國家中，那裡的基督徒是一個少數，卻對這一個人表示這樣大的尊敬，已與我們信仰的一些事物是有所關聯的，而這信仰卻是需要再加以聲明和宣揚的。因此我們合一和可信度之重點到底是什麼？
某些人認為，使他在這似乎是一種相互的矛盾中，成為合一之點，正是他的那種透明之整合性──他溝通的能力。其實就是對於現代心靈的想望和理智！他的內在所發出的真情和勇敢地說出他基本的信仰和信服，並且在他的生命中活出來。就是這一個人，他活出他所宣講的，這一種生命使他有別於世界上任何其他的領袖。一般的民眾都獲得同樣的訊息：我們必須反抗「不信神的東西」，它就是共產主義辯證唯物主義，以及同樣的，他猛烈抨擊世俗主義和西方「無靈性的唯物主義」方式的資本主義。民眾得到的都是一個相同的訊息，當他為不正義的事物而譴責獨裁者，以及走遍第三世界去宣講憐憫與和平的福音。雖曾經是有過某些的不一致，但尚且可使民眾能夠立即看到，在一個人身上，其本身並沒有矛盾，因為他對死刑以及在伊拉克的戰爭，都有同樣強烈的看法。他表現出我們的信靠是停留在我們所支持的真理上，並且這將使其他的人認出一個人的誠正。這也就是那種使人覺得若望保祿二世與人不同的地方與令人激賞之處。他在世界許多國家中，造就了一個家，並且顯示，羅馬並不是為天主教會，而是一個為世界上所有民族的家，這些民族仍舊相信，天主在我們的生命中仍是有個居所。
這也是值得我們要提出的，就是亞洲各種不同信仰的人們，不僅視若望保祿二世是羅馬的主教和今天天主教會的領袖，而且更以他是一位偉大的精神領袖，並且藉著為今日所有的人民爭取正義與和平，而成為一個聖德的辯護者。理由似乎是非常清楚，在現時代的理性主義之中，明顯地昇起一股倫理的相對主義，在那裡，人們固定了他們自己思想和行為的基準模式，包括那些宗教和政治上的領袖在內，人們立即看到他們所講的那些是與他們如何生活於其所言之間的顯明矛盾。就是在這一點上，德肋撒姆姆和若望保祿二世的名字和他們的工作和生活，都已呈現出達到憐憫和正義的人性最高價值。
我們亞洲人民在若望保祿二世身上，看到一位真正的先知，他領先地在新的千年裡，指示給他們一條道路。但最嚴肅的問題是，如果事實是成為教會內和世界中的混亂與分裂，因此在這兩者之前，將為普世教會和在亞洲的教會，是何等的一種挑戰呢？教宗若望保祿二世，如同眾人中的一位，他曾經藉著受到梵二大公會議深入而深奧的意識而影響的生命，走過來的，因此他正確地把教會從它「教會內的關懷（Intra-Ecclesiale Concern）」拖出，而將教會引入為一個在各個國家和各個民族間的交談之展望中，成為更富於福傳者的角色（傳教士的角色）。他到過一百二十九個國家去探訪，並不是以教會的領導人的身分去的，而是在天主國之緊急關頭上，使教會成為在各國之間之新的交談對象。這是基於信仰，就是耶穌的福音為我們的時代，仍是有它的適當性。我們將如何去面對正在成長中之世俗主義和相對主義，這些都是造成在歐洲和北美洲教會的分裂的原因，並且如今這兩種主義也造就了一條進入亞洲各個國家的道路。我們需要讓若望保祿二世的道路早日為新的春天而準備就緒。時間即在心靈的新條件，是在尋求符合天主計劃之生命重新成型而再度誕生。
為在亞洲的教會，二十六年之後，在此我們的確是有個新的挑戰，我們要重新界定亞洲各民族之間，教會福傳的意義，我們不是以來自波蘭的教宗的方向，而是以來自加里肋亞的教宗的道路，即那使我們回歸到基礎於耶穌基督之基督信仰的根的道路。我們必須從我們傳統本土化的道路，移至和不同文化間之先知性的道路，連同我們的聖父教宗本篤十六世的投入而在更新的小團體中，使這事成為可能。
（譯自Info on Human Development, March-May, 2005）
The Celebration of the Life of John Paul II
(1920-2005)
From Missio Ad Gentes to Missio Inter-Gentes
(From Mission to the Nations to Mission Among The Nations)
We have heard and read for the past month about the life of the great Pope John Paul II. We have put together, not so much the news about his life and death but about the views of people who look back at his life, his achievements and his shortcomings. We have put together, the views of people from diverse backgrounds both from those in the Catholic Church and people from other faiths and traditions.
It is interesting to note that a person generally acclaimed as the pope who changed the world and the spiritual leader of the world, is looked upon as the traditionalist with “conservative values” on abortion, contraception and homosexuality, especially by those within the Catholic church. How does this make sense when the views and perspectives of people of other faiths, including Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists and Jews have such a great respect for this person and for the positions that he has taken. They seem to stand impact of the growing secularism that is also related to the growth of liberalism, relativism and of course materialism and individualism. If this is the cause of division in Church we need to look at this matter so closely.
The claim by some that the 26 years of John Paul as the Shepherd of Rome has created divisions in the Church is interesting. We need to understand the reasons for such divisons, when the whole world including 200 world leaders together with millions of people showed such visible signs of unity and solidarity with the Church. Even in countries, where Christianity is a minority, such great respect to this man has to be related to the fundamentals of our faith that needs to be reasserted and proclaimed. What is therefore our point of unity and credibility?
Some would claim that what made him a point of unity amidst seeming contradictions was his transparent integrity - his ability to communicate. Truth to the world of the modern soul and intellect! He spoke with passion from his heart and with courage about his basic beliefs and convictions and lived that in his life. It was this person living what he proclaimed, that made him different from the other leaders of the world. Ordinary people got the same message: we must oppose “God-lessness” be it the dialectical materialism of communism and is equally vehement condemnation of secularism and “soulless materialism” of Western style capitalism. People get the same message when he took dictators to task for the injustices and preached a gospel of compassion and peace throughout the Third World. There was a certain inconsistency when people are able to see at once that there is no contradiction in a man who has equally strong views on the death penalty, as well as the war in Iraq. He showed that our credibility rests on the truths we uphold and live them out in authenticity and this makes others recognize one’s integrity. This is what seems to have made John Paul II different and admirable. He had made a home in so many nations of the world and was showed that Rome is not about the Catholic Church but a home for peoples of the World who still believe that God has still a place in our lives.
It is also interesting to note that people of all faiths in Asia not only regarded John Paul as die Bishop of Rome and the Leader of the Catholic Church today but as a great spiritual for all peoples today. The reasons seem obvious. In the midst of modern day rationalism there is definitely a rise of ethical relativism, where people fix their own benchmarks of thoughts and behaviour including those of religious and political leaders. People see at once the glaring contradictions between what they preach and how they live. It is here in this context that the names of Mother Theresa and John Paul II, and their works and lives have come to represent the highest human values of compassion and justice.
Our Asian people saw a true prophet in John Paul II showing them the path ahead in the new millennium. But the most serious question is if this is going to be cause of confusion and division in the Church and in the world, what are therefore the challenges ahead both for the universal church and the Church in Asia? Pope John Paul II as one of the persons who has journeyed through life influenced by the deep and profound insights of the Second Vatican Council has literally dragged the Church from its Intra-Ecclesial concerns to be more missionary in its outlook in dialogue among nations and peoples. His visit to 129 countries was not to bring the leader of the Church to the Nations but for the Church to be the New Dialogue Among Nations for the emergence of the Kingdom of God. This is founded on the belief that the Gospel of Jesus still has relevance for our times. How are we going to confront the forces of growing secularism and relativism that has cause divisions in the Church in Europe and North America and are now making in-road into almost every country in Asia. We need the ways of John Paul II's to be ready for new springtime. The time when new conditions of the heart long for the birth of new forms of life in keeping with the plans of God.
Here indeed lies our challenge after 26 years for the Church in Asia to articulate anew its meaning of Mission among People of Asia, with the path set by the Pope not from Poland but the Pope from Galilee returning us to the roots of Christianity founded on Jesus Christ. We have to move from our paths of traditional inculturation to prophetic ways of interculturation with the commitment of our Holy Father Pope Benedict the XVI to make this possible in small renewed communities.
Br. Anthony Rogers, FSC
（Selected from Info on Human Development, March-May, 2005）
若望保祿二世和他的
（Fr. Joel O. Jason SThL）
專家們都一致同意，教宗若望保祿二世對世界最獨特的貢獻之一，就是他的「基督信仰的人性位格主義」。這是一種看待人性的方法，以及只在人而天主，耶穌基督的光照下，認識（或欣賞）人性之美。這是一種從人猶如「天主肖像」的展望，來看人性位格的方法──一個具有天賦（自然）認識真理的能力，以及它的真正的美和良善是表露在於發現並接受那項真理，這就是他（教宗若望保祿二世）最先的第一部通諭「人類救主」的主要主題，這道通諭曾於一九七九年三月四日頒佈，前題就在於確信耶穌是真天主和真人，對人的真理之認識，應同樣地帶領我們到達基督。二十六年來他勇敢地教導這項真理。為這真理他受過苦。
當人山人海似的人群聚集在聖伯多祿大殿廣場參與他的殯葬彌撒時，大聲高喊「（Santa Subito）立即封聖」，並且全世界各處的群眾如今都稱他是「偉大的」（The great），某些人看若望保祿二世為「純真的人」，而他的教宗職，由於他對女性主義相關事宜，避孕，和在他人中之人性自由的立場，則是個「大失望」。但什麼才是若望保祿二世在這些議題上，真正的教導呢？
若望保祿二世與真正的自由
回想聖經意像描述，禁止吃知善惡樹的菓子，「你們可自由地享用樂園中各樹上的菓子……只有知善惡樹的菓子，你們不可吃」（創二16-17），若望保祿二世在「真理的光輝」通諭中，教導我們，這並不是由於天主不要我們知道何者為善以及何者為惡。這可是聖經的方式，它告訴我們，所謂何者為善，何者為惡，不是由人來決定的。決定何者為善，何者為惡，只有天主自己。而蛇的那個誘惑是，「當你們吃了的時刻，你們將肖似天主（神祇）……」（創三5）。厄娃以及後來的亞當就是陷入於這一個誘惑。而因此罪惡就進入人的歷史之中。
善是根基在真理之上，而真理是客觀的。人不可也不能捏造真理。人只能發現真理，並且必須固守聖經上所啟示的真理（天主律或神律），而在理智的反省則在人的本性上（自然律）。在這真理中我們成為自由的。以撒格、牛頓爵士並沒有發明，而只是單純地發現重量的定律，一個客觀的定律，一個我們要順從的定律，一個使我們獲得真正自由的法律。
虛假的自由是做我喜歡的力量，並不關心其對我自己和其對他人的後果是什麼。真正的自由是抉擇我要去做善事的力量。虛假的自由是基礎在個人的好惡上。真正的自由則是建基在真理上。舉例說明，假的自由是告訴我去碰觸紅光的定則。在過程中，我傷害或殺害我自己和其他的人。而真正的自由是即時告訴我要接受那條定律而選擇停止。因此，我變得更自由，因為它讓我活命而其他的人也一樣。
若望保祿二世看到贊同選擇權（Pro-choice）哲學猶如建基於同樣的蛇之欺騙（誘惑）。我選擇墮胎，因為這是我所喜歡的，而不關心那項選擇將對另一個活生生的人之權利將有何種意義，也不關心另一個人的存在，而我並無權掌管他人的生命。虛假的自由如今是許可──要做我所喜歡的力量。（不可思議的是，為什麼我們會給司機們，許可他們在街道任意駕車呢？或許這就是稱之為司機自由的時刻）。而許可則是一個罪，尤其是在聖經上受到譴責詛咒的。「……凡從人裡面出來的，……因為從裡面，從人心出來的是惡念……放蕩，褻瀆……」（谷七21-22）。自由一離開規律（法律）就不能達成。以非常清楚的區分，若望保祿二世所提出的，就是，真正的自由不是沒有規律（anomy）（a-without; nomos-Law法律）或是缺乏法律。真正的自由如今是自律（Autonomy）（auto-self自己；nomos-Law法律），或是在人本身內在法律的整全。更確切地說，以基督徒的看法，真正的自由是一種天主律（神律）的分享（Theos-God; nomos-law）；就是在天主的法律中分享。
若望保祿二世與真正的女性主義
若望保祿二世在真正自由之教導的一個必要的影響，就是肯定，男人和女人將在發現和保持他們各自真正之所是的真理之中，經驗到真正自我的實現。若望保祿二世提出，兩性真正的解放是發生在發現「人到底是誰」。而這就意謂著一種重新肯定並重新評價一切有關他們的獨特性，唯一性，和互補性，非必要的劃一性。在宗座文告「婦女尊嚴」中，若望保祿二世警告而對抗那欺騙婦女陷入思考，只有在婚姻、母性和家庭之外，才能找到自我實現的騙局（誘惑），在婦女晉鐸的問題上，若望保祿二世，教會也從來沒有，也不願教導說，婦女「不適任」鐸職（聖秩）。可能這就是若望保祿的理由，即為什麼他常描繪司鐸聖職是一種聖召而並不種職業？是一項禮物（恩惠）而不是一項權利（請求）？事實上，這是教會堅定的教導，即沒有人是「適任」聖秩職務的。如果是這樣的話，那麼童貞瑪利亞，「婦女中最受祝福的」，而事實上，在一切萬有之中，就應是最有資格成為被選者了。祂在加里肋亞服職的期間裡，耶穌明白地給與婦女她們天職的尊嚴而輕視祂當時世俗對婦女的偏見。祂經常以行動反對那些不正義之歧視實務，召喚她作為宗徒們的首腦，成為祂決定性的定論。但為著某種理由，耶穌並沒有將聖秩授予瑪利亞，也沒有授予其他的婦女，雖然在所有的男人都逃離，而她們仍站在祂的身邊。雖然並沒有任何穩定的神學理由，阻碍婦女晉聖秩，而婦女的晉升聖秩可能會在未來的教會中實現，什麼時候將是確定的時機，則要留心觀察耶穌，宗徒們和他們後來的繼承人怎麼做。教會做她該做的事，動機是由於對宗徒的信實，而不是歧視。
另外一個相關的一點，最近的一封投書給較大的日報的信件，也是評論若望保祿二世的，是由於封聖的事件，一位現時代的婦女，她選擇了在發生爭議性複雜事件時，她寧犧牲自己而使她的孩子活下來。這原本就不是什麼特殊的事件，但這事必須回映到吉安娜•貝瑞達•莫拉，因為她是在一九九四年四月廿四日，正是國際家庭年期間，為若望保祿二世敕封為真福。信上質問：「這事傳遞了什麼訊息呢？很好，犧牲自己生命而捨棄其他的孩子在後面？」不是的。它所傳遞的訊息是「婦女豈能忘掉自己的乳嬰，初為人母的，豈能忘掉親生的兒子？」（依四十九15）。這位婦女被封聖，不是因為一個生命比另一個生命更好。她被封聖是因為她生命所傳遞的訊息是「人若為自己的朋友捨掉性命，再沒有比這更大的愛情了」（若十五13）。若望保祿二世敕封這一位現時代的女性為聖人，是因為母親職是第一所我們學習這些價值的學校。而某些被誤導的女性主義哲學卻奪走了女性高貴的母親職。
當前另外正發展中的張力是，婦女想要孩子卻不要丈夫，也不要婚姻生活。因此，試管胚胎植入生產之診所和代理孕母（子宮出租）的操作出現了。諷刺的是，這種女性主義的想法，所有更加具體化出租婦女為代理孕母。她們幾乎只剩下她們的子宮。可悲的是，孩童們也被物化了。若望保祿二世在「家庭團體」宗座勸諭中提醒我們，孩童是婚姻聖約的禮物。他們不是由於我們的任性而有的財物。作為禮物，其天賦的第一個權利，孩童應該在一個家庭的環境中受教養，並且這個家庭要有父母的臨在。老實說，單親家庭的存在確實是一種不幸。我們不要數落這些單親的人士，因為他們不是必須受譴責的。但因我們的任性而把孩童推進這樣的情況之中，我們成年人也太不負責任和自私了。
若望保祿二世也動人心弦地教導一些有關人的肉體（身體），並且要求我們要尊重它。他的「身體神學」是他在論性的責任，純潔和貞潔事務上之教導核心。我們常聽到他說這句話：「如果你擁有它，就要烗耀它」。為若望保祿二世而言，某些事是藏而不露並須保持隱私（密）的，並不是因為它不雅。相反地，某些事物保持其隱密正是它們是美的，事實上是美到近乎神聖。這就是為什麼夫婦之間慶祝他們的婚姻行為不能在公園裡而要在他們的房間裡的隱密處。這就是為什麼有人侵入我們「內在的至聖所」我們持之為神聖的人與物時，我們會感覺受到侵犯。隨著若望保祿二世思想的路線，黃色（情色）的犯意歹念不是因為它揭露得太多。相反地，是它對人性之位格啟示得太少。它惹人注意人體的美，只在他或她性的吸引力而已。它貶抑人的身體為一件商品和一件慾樂的對象。婦女真正的解放是在於發現這一項深奧的真理，就是某些為我們生活的時代所遺忘的事物。
最近有一篇社論也責備若望保祿二世對避孕之事的教導，說是這種教導就是造就世界上貧窮的原因。這樣的一種聲明完完全全對該議題的誤解，某些澄清都已清楚交待了。教宗若望保祿二世，連整個教會也是一樣，都從未教導夫妻們應儘可能生育兒女，愈多愈好。夫妻們只要按照理性判斷來教養及能力所及來生養兒女。教會甚至不教導說，每一次夫妻之行房都要有生育兒女的結果，因為這是不可能的，女性的自然不孕週期已點出這事。教會所教導的是，夫妻間每次行房之行為應保留開放成為父母親職之可能性。夫妻們所表現的這一種開放，是當他們不採用任何行為或方法（避孕）作為它（行動）的意圖，就是意圖在那一次行房不會有懷孕的結果。避孕倫理上是不可接受的，並不是因為它是人為（非自然的）方式，而是因為它是避孕的──就是它實際地破壞和防止可能成孕的生命。同樣地，自然家庭計劃（NFP）是倫理上可接受，並不是因為它不是人工方法，而是它不是一種避孕。在NFP（自然家庭計劃）中，夫妻單純地正確運用女人自然可孕或不可孕週期，天主對她所設想的方法。在自然家庭計劃中（NFP），沒有想要到來的這個生命是被摧毀或被阻止的。這就是單純女性在它最自然的美，藉著它自然的可孕和不可孕的週期，是天主企望它是這樣的方法。某些人指控這一種教導猶如一項「天主在生育秩序中永恆法律的物理主義者之一種束手無策」。我徹底地反對。物理主義者是要相信男人和女人在他物理性和性的衝擊下是沒有權能的。而NFP告訴我們的是另外的事。我們節制我們生殖的生活是藉著理性而不是因為季節。
明顯地，這個是要求紀律以及夫妻間的交談溝通。在這之中有NFP的美。負責的父母親職成為一項分享的責任。交談被推動而丈夫被教導善待妻子，反之亦然，不是如同一個被動的財物而是如同一位伴侶。在NFP，婦女是真實地受到尊重，因為我們不再以充滿傷害性和潛在不幸之化學物品（藥物）以控制她的可孕期而摧殘她的肉體。在NFP上，我們不屈服於任何化學物品，因為這完全是個人負責和人性紀律的國度。
如今樞機主教們正準備教宗選舉會議，以選舉下一任教宗。充滿著對下一任教宗到底是「傳統的」或「自由派」等猜測。教宗的傳記作家喬治維格（George Weigel），當他被問到，教宗若望保祿二世在歷史上要如何定位，他簡潔地回答說：「他是一個偉大的基督見證者」。當樞機主教們聚集在四月十八日樞機主教秘密會議中，傳統或自由派的抉擇，將不會出現在議程中。他們將祈求聖神的，是一位見證者──一位對相關天主，愛和人類之真理的見證者。Veni Creator Spiritus！造物主聖神，請降臨！
喬耶O.葉森神父（Fr. Joel O. Jason SThL）是菲律賓馬尼拉總教區的教區神父。他目前被任命為位於馬卡，瓜特拉盧貝的聖加祿大修院的神師。他也是倫理神學教授，性和生物倫理學，並且領導馬尼拉總教區之「家庭與生命」部門的職務。
（譯自Info on Human Develepment, March-May, 2005）
John Paul II And His ‘Christian Personalism’
Fr. Joel O. Jason, SThL
Experts are agreed that one of the most unique contributions of John Paul II to the world is his "Christian personalism." It is a way of looking at humanity and appreciating his beauty only in the light of the man-God, Jesus Christ. It is a way of looking at the human person from the perspective of man as imago dei, "image of God" - a creature who has a natural capacity to know the truth, and whose true beauty and goodness unfolds in the discovery and embracing of that truth. This was the main thesis of his very first encyclical letter, Redemptor Hominis (The Redeemer of Man) which came out March 4, 1979 premised on the Christian conviction of Jesus as both true God and true man, understanding the truth about man should likewise lead us to Christ. For 26 years he has courageously taught this truth. For this truth he has suffered.
While the sea of humanity gathered at St. Peter's for his funeral clamoured "santo subit" (sainthood now), and the multitudes all over the world now call him "II Grande" (the great), some view John Paul II as "naive" and his papacy "a great disappointment" for his stand on feminist concerns, contraception, and human freedom among others. But what did John Paul II really teach on these issues?
John Paul II and genuine freedom
Reflecting on the Biblical imagery prohibiting partaking of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, "You are free to eat from any of the trees... except the tree of knowledge of good and bad" (Gen.2:16-l7), John Paul teaches in Veritatis Splendor (The Splendor of Truth) that it is not because God does not want us to know what is good and what is bad. Rather it is the Biblical way of telling us that it is not for man to decide what is good and what is bad. To decide what is good and what is bad is God's alone. That was temptation of the serpent, "the moment you eat you shall be like Gods..." (Gen. 3:5). Eve, and later Adam fell into that temptation. And so began the entry of sin in history.
Goodness is based on the truth and truth is objective. Man does not and cannot invent the truth. Man only discovers the truth and must cling to that truth as revealed in Scriptures (Divine Law), and in rational reflection on human nature (natural law). In that truth we become free. Sir Isaac Newton did not invent but merely discovered the law of gravity, a law that is objective, a law that we obey, a law that makes us truly free.
Counterfeit freedom is the power to do what I like, regardless of its consequence on myself and others. Genuine freedom is the power to choose what I ought, to do the good. Counterfeit freedom is based on personal likes and dislikes. Genuine freedom is founded on the truth. To illustrate, false freedom tells me to beat the law of the red light. In the process, I harm or kill myself and others. Genuine freedom prompts me to embrace that law to choose to stop. Then I become more free, because it keeps me alive and others as well.
John Paul II sees the pro-choice philosophy as founded on the same serpentine seduction. I choose abortion because this is what I like, regardless of what that choice will mean for the rights of another living person, regardless of the truth of the existence of another person over whose life I have no sovereignty. Counterfeit freedom is actually license – the power to do what I like. (Wonder why people issued with a drivers' license behave the way they do in the streets? Maybe it's time to call it drivers' freedom.) And license is a sin specifically condemned in Scriptures " ...from within people... come evil thoughts...licentiousness, envy, blasphemy..." (Mark 7:21-22). Freedom cannot be achieved apart from the law. With insightful distinction, John Paul proposed that genuine freedom is not anomy (a - without; nomos-law) or the absence of law. Genuine freedom is actually autonomy (autos-self; nomos-law) or the integration of the law within one's self. More precisely, in the Christian point of view, genuine freedom is a participated theonomy (theos-God; nomos-law), i.e., a participation in God's law.
John Paul II and genuine feminism
A necessary consequence of John Paul's teaching on genuine freedom is the affirmation that men and women will experience true fulfilment in discovering and remaining in the truth of who they really are John Paul II proposes that the true liberation, of the sexes happens in the discovery of who humanity really is. And that means a re-affirmation and re-appreciation of the truth about their singularity, uniqueness, and complementarity, not necessarily uniformity. In Mulieris Dignitatem (The Dignity of Women) John Paul II warns against the seduction that deceives women into thinking that it is only outside of marriage, maternity and the family that can find fulfilment.
On the question of ordination of women, John Paul, nor the Church has never nor will teach that women are "unfit" for ordination. Could this be the reason why John Paul has always described the priesthood as a vocation and not a profession? A gift and not a claim? In fact, it has been the consistent teaching of the Church that no one is "fit" for ordination. If it were so, the Virgin Mary, "blessed among women," and in fact among all creation, would have been the most worthy candidate. In the course of His Galilean ministry, Jesus definitely gave women their inherent dignity despite the bias against women of His age. Always acting against unjust discriminatory practices, calling her as head of the apostles would have been the clincher. But for some reason, Jesus did not confer it on Mary nor on the other women who stood by Him when all the men ran away. While there may not be any solid theological reason that would prevent women from being ordained, and while women ordination may come to be in the future of the Church, what is sure at the moment is that mindful of what Jesus, the apostles and their later successors did, the Church does what she does, from the motive of apostolic fidelity, not discrimination.
Another related point. A recent letter to a major daily also criticized John Paul for canonizing saint, a modern-day woman who choose that should complications arise, her child be allowed to live instead of her. It was not specific but she must be referring to Gianiia Beietta-Molla who was beatified by Pope John Paul II on April 24, 1994, during the International Year of the Family. The letter asked, "What signal did it send? That it was alright to die and leave other children behind? " No. The signal it sends is "Can a mother forget her infant, be without tenderness for the child in her womb?" (Isaiah 49:15) The woman was canonized not because one life is better than the other. She was canonized because the signal her life sends is "No greater love a man can have, than to lay his life for a friend." (John 15:13) John Paul canonized that modern-day woman because motherhood is the first school where we learn these values. And some misguided feminist philosophies are robbing motherhood of its nobility.
Another developing trend nowadays is women who want children but not a husband nor marriage. Thus, the proliferation of in vitro (in a petri dish) fertility clinics and womb-for-hire practices. Ironically, this feminist mentality all the more objectifies the women hired as surrogates. They are only as good as their womb. Sadly, the children too are objectified. John Paul in Familiaris Consortio reminds us that children are gifts of the marital covenant. They are not properties we can have at our whim. As gifts, the first inherent right children deserve is to be nurtured in the context of a family and the paternal and maternal presence it provides. Truly, it is unfortunate that there are single parent families. We do not fault these single parents for they are not necessarily to be blamed. But to subject children purposely into such situation by our whims would be grossly irresponsible and selfish on the part of us adults.
John Paul also taught eloquently about the human body and the respect it command. His "theology of the body" is the core of his teachings on sexual responsibility, purity and chastity. We hear it often said, "If you have it, flaunt it." For John Paul II, some things are hidden to be kept private not because it's ugly. On the contrary, some things are kept private because they are beautiful, too beautiful in fact as to be sacred. This is why couples celebrate the marital act not in parks but in the privacy of their rooms. This is why we feel violated when others invade our "inner sanctums," the things/persons we hold sacred. Following John Paul II's line of though, the malice of pornography is not because it reveals too much. On the contrary, it reveals too little of the human person. It arrests the person's beauty only to his/her sexual attractiveness. It reduces the human body to a commodity and an object of pleasure. The true liberation of women lies in the discovery of this profound truth, something commonly ignored by the times we live in.
A recent editorial also blamed John Paul II's teaching on contraception has the reason for the poverty in the world. Such a statement betrays a gross misunderstanding of the issue. Some clarifications are in order. John Paul, nor the Church has never taught that couples should have as many children as they could. Couples are only to raise children that they could reasonably look after and provide for. The Church does not even teach that each act of marital intercourse should result in a child because it does not. The natural periods of female infertility points to this. What the Church teaches is that each act of marital intercourse should remain open to the possibility of parenthood. This openness couples manifest when they do not resort to acts or methods (contraception) that have as its intent that no life shall be conceived from this intercourse. Contraception is morally unacceptable not because it is artificial, but because it is contraceptive - i.e., it actually destroys and prevents life from being conceived. Likewise, natural family planning (NFP) is morally acceptable not because it is not artificial, but because it is not contraceptive. In NFP, couples simply tune in to the natural fertility/infertility cycles of the woman, the way God intended her to be. In NFP, no such life is destroyed or prevented from coming to be. It is simply sex in its most natural beauty, with its natural period of fertility and infertility, the way God intended it to be. Some accuse this teaching as a "physicalist strand of the Eternal Law of God in the order of procreation. I beg to disagree. What is physicalist is to believe that man and woman is powerless before his physical/sexual urged. NFP tells us otherwise. We control our reproductive lives by reason, not by season.
Obviously, this requires discipline and dialogue from couples. Herein lies the beauty of NFP. Responsible parenthood becomes a shared responsibility. Dialogue is promoted and the husband is taught to treat the wife or vice versa, not as a passive property but as a partner. In NFP, the woman is truly respected because we do not dump her body with harmfill and potentially fatal chemicals to control her fertility. In NFP, we do not surrender to chemicals something that is properly the realm of personal responsibility and human discipline.
Now the Cardinals are preparing for the conclave to choose the next Pope. Speculations of whether the next Pope should be "traditional" or "liberal" abound. Papal biographer George Weigel, when asked how John Paul II will be remembered by history answered succinctly. "He is the great Christian witness." When the Cardinals gather in a conclave on the 18th of April, traditional or liberal will not be in the agenda. What they will ask the Holy Spirit for is a man of witness - a witness to the truth about God, love and humanity. Veni Creator Spiritus! (Come, Creator Spirit!)
Fr. Joel O. Jason is a diocesan priest of the Archdiocese of Manila. He is presently assigned as spiritual director of San Carlos Seminary in Guadalupe, Makati. He is also professor of Moral Theology, Sexuality and Bioethics and heads the Ministry for Family and Life of the Archdiocese of Manila.
(Printed with permission from the author and was also published in the Manila Bulletin, April 17, 2005)
(Selected from Info on Human Development, March-May 2005)
若望保祿二世：
多默梅藍巴藍皮爾總主教，SDB
教宗若望保祿二世的辭世劃下一個時代句點。這一個多方面的人物實在是難以下定論。人們稱他是一個偉大的教會領導人，一位令人印象深刻世界形象，一位思想深遠的人，一位聰明的策略家，一位有謀略的政治家，一位有才華的演員，一位傑出的詩人，一位正義的鬥士以及一位和平的使者。教宗若望保祿二世自己想做的，無非是一位福傳傳教士。從他存在的核心看，他相信，他之所以蒙召選，無非就是要做一位福音的見證人。
歷史上這個第一位波蘭籍的教宗做出了，使他唯一生命的計劃，將福音的力量帶到人類每一個活動的領域，人類社會每一個層次和人類思想的每一個幅度。他以下面的話開始他的教宗職：「不要怕，開放，不，要大開大門迎接基督。對基督救恩的力量開放各國的疆界，開放經濟和政治的體系，廣大的文化帝國，文明和發展」。帶著這項訊息，他繞著地球旅行。誠如他是伯鐸的繼承人，他同樣渴望成為保祿，這位在基督宗教史上最偉大的福音傳播者的追隨者，在他這廿幾年的教宗任內，他完成了超過一百萬公里的牧靈旅程並向超過一千三百萬民眾講話。
他絕對相信，基督不能「在地球上任何地方，任何世界緯度或經度，從人類歷史上被排除在外」。如同他旅行拉丁美洲，他被問到，他隨手帶來什麼東西。他立即的回答就是：「我帶來信仰，這難道不夠嗎？」在薩伊親吻非洲的土地後，他大喊說：「我是以一位牧人，耶穌基督的僕人的身分，來到你們這裡，我來是如一個有信仰的人，一位和平與希望的使者」。
以福音影響現世代文化的造塑
若望保祿二世認為他自己，不單純地是天主教團體的牧人，也不只是基督信仰世界的領袖，他更是全人類的一個代言人。他關切整個人類的各種事物：正義、和平、和解、生命、家庭、發展、政治、人權、經濟、文化。他認為，運用外交作為教會有所作為的工具去面對社會的影響之時代已過去了，而更是要意義深遠地，與人們藉他們每一天生活所活出來的塑型和更具造形的文化交談，他特別喜愛與有識之士：歷史學家、哲學家、作家、科學家、詩人、藝術家、音樂家等產生互動。他認為這樣的一種交換（交流）在長期會較有深遠的影響，比設法遷就那些高層的政治領袖，更具意義，因為所謂的政治家，他們各有他們自己的既定利益。從一九八三年以來，他舉辦了為基督信徒、猶太教徒、不可知論者、無神論之哲學家、歷史學家和其他學者在岡道爾夫堡，常是熱心傾聽他們的心聲，他保持著學習的態度。他經常是一位熱心殷勤的學生。在他年輕的時代中，他常過於被視為是一位哲學家，想做些與現代生活不一樣的事務，維辛斯基樞機主教，一位人人印象深刻且具有政治手腕的人，也認為伏蒂瓦（Wojtyla）的影響太過於理論了。
作為一位主教，伏蒂瓦（Wojtyla）在他的牧靈訪視時，就帶著兩隻公事包的書，馬克思、列寧和史大林的著作與基督信仰的傳統書籍各置一邊。他認為知曉「他人」的思想（想法）是件重要的事，甚至是反對或敵對的一方，為的是要能與他或她進入一項知性的對話。為伏蒂瓦（Wojtyla）而言，交談是一種程序性尋求真理的方法，而不是一種對某人的信仰予以否定。他常是一位隨時隨地的學習者。每一個思想的學院（宗派），他都有很大的興趣。無論如何，目的是在把他所學到的東西都能服役於福音。保祿宗徒不是說：「我將所有人的心思奪回並使之歸服於基督」？（格後十：5）
將福音帶到公開的生活上
新教宗，他曾經是個田徑選手和一位運動員，他表示觀念沒有必要停滯於貧乏無用，而是可以把它轉入為一種制度和改變歷史方向的運動。他明確地使它成為福音所產生的能量。它是連同靈修的能量一起的，即是神聖禮儀所提供的，和基督信仰訊息所引發的獻身投入，使得他激勵波蘭在她爭取自由的奪鬥中，確定她的國家命運。他證實了信仰於人之主體位格的尊嚴與價值，這些都是聖經所啟發的，都有廣大的政治影響力。當他不鼓勵司鐸們和會士們不要直接參與政治事物，他卻要求要把福音訊息的寶藏帶入社會，以便帶來政治生活上的更生和社會的轉變。
在經濟的領域上，東歐的教會領袖不相信任何型式從上而下或從下而上之壓制每一個其他的人之平等。他的基督的信從迫使他為所有人的公正而工作，是與最軟弱的人一起開始。當他堅定地支持東歐追求正義與自由運動時，他是倡導一種和平的方法。他堅持，改革的壓力要足夠強烈到，能夠帶來改變的渴望，但慢慢地到了足以保證一種和平的交替。在這一點上，他成功了。以極高度的手法，他結合人性的明智與福意的勇氣，如同他指導波蘭藉著不流血的革命而得到自由，全世界都感到驚奇，他證實了那似乎是不可能，卻成為可能的，他相信，只有以和平的方式爭取的自由，才合乎福音的精神，其他各國也都追隨波蘭的方法。
一個演員轉化成教宗，若望保祿二世代替受壓迫的，不正義或不平等待遇的受害者發聲，甚至世界遙遠的一端。他被錯誤地劃成是一位反對「解放神學」的人。事實上，他生命所有的行動都集中在一種解放使命的週遭。他目前所做的，都指示出那種與一種已經失敗的體系堅密相連之社會分析的方法之限度。再者，他選擇貧窮的人，從來不是與他們結黨。這並不是排他性的。他向不正義宣戰，但不用暴力。他不相信一位「政客的耶穌，一個革命家，來自納匝肋的破壞分子」。
在伏蒂瓦身上顯著的就是他對人（之主體位格）的熱情，和他發掘「歷史的靈修幅度」的能力，因此，他對我們時代之假人文主義，提供了一個強而有力的另外選項，對於他，席里樞機主教說過：「若望保祿二世復甦了世界的宗教意識」。
宣講和平，和解（和好），愛，生命的福音
他曾經歷過了人類歷史上最血腥的戰爭，這一位熱心爭取自由的鬥士成為一個和平的優勝者。他曾目睹太多的血腥事件了。他甚至他在波蘭時，最具「革命性」的演說中，也祈求天主的愛。他看到過瘋狂的怒恨摧毀個人和毀滅團體的力量。他也見過某些意識型態和理論，是如何快速地將他們自己轉變為無理性的暴力。這就是為什麼他堅持拒絕為爭取正義的奮鬥給與任何神學或哲學後盾支持，只要這項奮鬥的形態是暴力作為償還的條件。他不斷地教導，教會之首要的任務就是良知的培育，而不是政治的陰謀。
在一九八二年十一月六日，若望保祿二世對年輕人講話時說：「任何人只要讓自己受唯物主義和暴力的意識型態誘惑……暴力不是一條建設的道路。它冒犯天主」。他曾對黎巴嫩的基督信友說：「我請求你們立即停止這一種殺害兄弟的鬩牆之爭」（一九九○年二月六日），而這事就停止了。在愛爾蘭，他主張「我雙膝跪下，我請求你們擺脫暴力這一條路而回歸和平之途」。在向前南斯拉夫的基督信友講話，當時在前南斯拉夫原先是柯羅埃西亞人，塞爾維亞人，天主教徒，東正教徒和回教穆斯林在一起生活的地方，他說：「我們的信仰告訴我們，我們缺乏彼此就得不到幸福，況且我們還彼此相互攻擊」（一九九五年十月十七日）。在突尼西亞，一九九六年他大聲急呼：「任何人都不能以天主之名殺人；任何人都不能造成一位兄弟死亡的原因」。在賴吉利亞，他回應了同樣的訊息。他曾寫信給撒達姆海珊，勸告他以智慧面對衝突。他寫信給布希總統，提醒他，對他正要引發的戰爭的後果，他要負起歷史上的責任。
這一位令人訝異的人，在他年輕時，他曾經歷過納粹和蘇維埃的暴力，他卻以基督之名呼籲和平。他以全人類的名義力勸大家要規避暴力。因此，若望保祿二世的話是一種普世的呼籲。他代表著全世界的良知，迫使大家對人類最困擾的問題，都要尋求和平的解決方法，他為整個人類家庭而憂愁，當他看到怨恨已在蠢動。他為人類的未來感到憂心。他支持那種在個人的層級上必須包括犧牲的愛，在家庭的環境中，以及在政治與社會複雜之中，愛應是人類所有的煩惱解決的關鍵。「不要害怕愛，因為它賦與人們清楚的要求。這些要求都的確能使你的愛成為真愛」。為他而言，福音就是愛。在德肋撒姆姆身上，他想，這已具人性的形式。他小心翼翼地耕耘這一個活生生的圖像（icon）。
這似乎是人性求生存的一種直觀，當他在捍衛生命而說話時，它們給與若望保祿二世的一種辯題。尊重生命從一存在的時刻開始，是在堅持的訊息。墮胎和殺嬰為他都是如同屠殺一樣。他早已就緒要冒著戴著「不受歡迎」、「無人緣」帽子之危險，以及直接站在反對者的立場以拯救人類社會於一種「死亡的福音」之中，他想建造一個「愛的文明」。
他對那些古老傳統基督徒社會的思想與教會的教導漸行漸遠而且慢慢地老化與衰退而感到痛苦。這樣的一種痛苦的環境使他做出一條直接以「希望的福音」接近年輕人。並且他成就了很大的一步。
重新肯定基督信仰的根
傳統基督信仰的國家之快速俗化的文化，使得這位偉大的教宗感到憂心，但他常保持樂觀和信心。因為他對於福音的力量有完善的信仰。他曾提醒法國，她（法國）曾經是教會的長女，就應該忠實於她領洗的誓言。他提醒意大利，注意她是天主公教會的靈魂，她那令人欣喜的熱心，朝聖地，家庭文化，她的機構，建築物，藝術和文學，都是如此深植在天主公教會認同的基礎上。他對於已開發國家，指出它們太過於自信，過分地誇耀它的「時代的來臨」，一直成長的自治，成年期，和相信進步，而不推入於新的千年以顯示無自信的訊號，害怕，對於未來的不確定性，缺乏自我價值觀。他提出：「在千年的結束時，我們必須省察：我們在那裡，基督把我們帶到那裡，我們從福音那裡，逃到那裡去了」（一九九三年十一月二日）。
他告訴斯拉夫族人，斯拉夫民族的國家的合一（或統一）不是社會主義，而是他的共同的信仰。波蘭人，柯羅西亞人，斯拉夫人，保加利亞人，莫拉維亞人，史洛瓦克人，捷克人，塞爾維亞人，俄羅斯人和立陶宛人，大家都接受了同一洗禮。這一個歷史上具有意義的事件，提供了渴望的結合力量，並且是屹立不搖的。他呼籲大家要放棄（捨棄）史大林式的東西歐的觀念，並要為一個歐盟只有一個「心靈」（靈魂）祈禱。他毫無懷疑，就是基督徒的信仰將呼出一個靈魂進入這個政治團體。這就是他的歷史深遠意義，和對文化的深入了解和宗教的象徵主義，並使得他宣佈聖齊利祿和梅杜迪斯為歐洲的共同主保。為大部分的民眾，這事似乎是純粹對東方的情感的一個讓步。為若望保祿二世，他了解文化會形成福傳的本質，這是「將他們歷史和文化回歸給東中歐洲的舉動」。他希望基督信仰的形像再度成為再生的首要象徵和文化的整全。
永不疲倦的福傳者
身為一位具有極高才幹的福傳工作的策略者，若望保祿二世衷心地相信，福音必須要傳遍全球的眾民族。他愛非洲，那裡基督信仰在上一個世紀內成長得最快速。他高度地關切亞洲古老的文明，以及深遠地尊重印度宗教上的嚴肅。基督也是屬於他們的，他是這樣認定的。他大聲疾呼「真理電台」、「基督和祂的教會不能自外於任何其他民族，國家或文化」。當他提到印度或中國，他的臉閃亮發光。他同樣地對較小的國家感興趣，他曾熱切問及高棉、寮國、米安瑪、尼泊爾、不丹、阿富汗的情形。他維持祈禱的「地理」，也即不忽視這星球上的任何地方的任何一個人。基督是屬於眾人的。他強烈地主張，每一個人都有權利聽到天主救恩的訊息。他確信，這是教會應有的責任要把她所相信的真理推陳出去，但絕對不會強制。
若望保祿二世的深刻基督徒的信仰並不使他成為宗派大師。為他而言，徹底信仰基督意思就是徹底獻身給人類以及為每一個誕生在這一個世界上每一個人負責的深遠意義。他感到基督信仰有某些非常重要的東西，要奉獻給人類社會，而教會更有一種無法取代的角色要做，以實現人類社會之終極命運；因為他相信，教會常堅持絕對價值。他預報了「一個基督信仰的大春天」，並已看到它的第一個徵兆。他催促年輕人要「走出去到大街小巷，和進入公共場所，像第一批的宗徒一樣」去宣報好消息。他自信，年輕的一代正在基督信仰中尋找意義，這個基督信仰正是他們早期所錯過的。年輕人聚集在一起與他相會，在馬尼拉就有四到五百萬人，可能是人類歷史上最大的一次群眾聚會。不顧別人的批評，他的著作廣受歡迎。超過八百萬本天主教教理，是他帶出來要作為一般民眾可閱讀的基督信仰教義訊息，而且在出版期間，短期內就銷售一空。
這一位斯拉夫裔來自波蘭的教宗是一位具有先知特性的人，他在亞細細與其他各宗教的領袖一起舉辦和平祈禱會，確實驚嚇了全世界。他靈巧的運用象徵比他的話更加動人：橄欖樹枝，和平的火焰，取潔的禮儀，鴿子飛向天空，發光的火炬，雙手合十，兄弟間擁抱。當他言及奧斯維茨（Auschwitz）、廣島（Hiroshima）或長崎（Nagasaki），就有他所說的某些神秘奧妙之情節的事物。他擁有一種對歷史與文化之深刻的意識，並且知道如何去扣人心弦。他曾為教會（基督徒）在歷史上加給他人的傷害，尋求寬恕，並準備好給與寬恕。當他在災難和天災發生而介入其事時，他的言詞和舉止都有非比尋常的品質，他似乎是要點出永恆的事物。在非洲，他參與非洲的價值觀：尊敬祖先，尊重母親和兒童，社會的團結關懷。在拉丁美洲，他暢談受壓迫的人之尊嚴與人權。他向全世界的原住民講話，他讚嘆他們祖先的智慧和他們文化的美，為他，天主從未放棄任何民族。
作為歷史上最長時間教宗職務上之一的人，若望保祿二世對未來有個先知性的看法。他立即向年輕人呼籲，甚至在已上了年紀的歲月中，也向他們揭露他那無法言傳的能力可觸及新興世代的波長。當他開始召開各洲際的主教會議，他設定推動一種本土認同之培育過程，文化的成熟，以及在本土中的神學反省，藉著設法去重視世界不同區域的聖德，並且從各個不同的國家，文化區塊，種族，修會團體和職場上的人士中，敕封了許多聖人，他告訴世界說，任何人都是蒙召要成聖的。雖則是知性上的傾向，但他鼓勵一般凡人的熱心崇拜，他深入地介入於人性事物，但他卻仔細地渴望保全教會正式敬拜禮時，那些屬於聖的意義。當在支援古老的修會時，他一眼就看到那種顯示特別依附在教會中的那一種新意。而在強調聖職人員和修會士的培育時，他小心地追隨不同的教會運動，它們的靈修能量，即他渴望輕輕地敲打的。為他，神學化並非由基督徒中知識份子的桌上開始的，而是從基督信徒信仰經驗而來的。歷史已告訴他，這一種平凡的信徒將是明天的福傳者，沒有必要是綁在桌上的專業思想家。
「不要怕向你尚未認識的人，呈現基督給他們」，他是要說：「基督是真正的答案，最完整的答案……」（一九九二年世界青年日）。
天主是他唯一的對話者
不顧他自己密集環訪世界的活動，不顧他與上百萬計的信友，仰慕者，朋友，熟人和工作同仁之間的互動，若望保祿二世只有一個最親密的：天主。他在祂台前花費很長的時間。基督是他唯一對話者。也就是同祂一起，他解決他自己的問題，他讓許多國家得到自由，鼓勵上百萬計的人進入熱愛生命的行列。「在深邃的內在生命的空虛中，一位司鐸不知不覺就會陷入而成為一個辦事員（職員）」，伏蒂瓦（Wojtyla）曾經向一位小修生透露，他自己不會這麼做，他會把自己轉進為我們時代最有力的福音見證人。
他那種確實的訊息就是，「讓你們自己為基督所中悅，就是那以可見的和可效法的形式，出現在我們中間的永恆者。願你們自己為祂的榜樣所吸引，祂的表樣改變了世界的歷史並指引世界向著令人振奮的目標前進，願你們自己為聖神的愛所愛，因為祂想要使你們遠離世俗的事物，而在你身上開始一個『新』的你之生命，即在天主的方式下之正直和真實的聖德中受造」。
「與耶穌基督相愛吧，生活於祂那真實的生命中，因此，我們的世界將在福音的光照下，獲得生命」（門徒們〔I discepoli〕，一九九一年十一月一日）
資訊來源：Vidajyoti, Journal of Theological Reflection, Volume 69, No5）
John Paul II: The Most Powerful Witness
To The Gospel In Our Times
Archbishop Thomas Menamparampil, SDB
The departure of Pope John Paul II marks the end of an era. This many-sided personality baffles definition. People have called him a great Church leader, an impressive world figure, a deep thinker, an intelligent strategist, a wily politician, a skillful actor, an outstanding poet, a fighter for justice, and an ambassador for peace. John Paul himself intended to be no more than a missionary. Form the core of his being he believed that he was called to be nothing other than a witness to the Gospel.
The first Polish Pope in all history made it his sole programme of life to bring the power of the gospel to every spheres.of 'human activity, every level of human society and every dimension of human thought. He began his pontificate with the words, “Be not afraid, open up, no, swing wide the gates to Christ. Open up to his saving power the confines of the states, open up the economic and political systems, the vast empires of culture, civilization and development.” Carrying this message, he travelled round the globe. If he was the successor of Peter, he desired to be equally a faithful follower of Paul, the greatest missionary in Christian history. Within twenty years of his pontificate he had covered more than a million kilometres on pastoral trips and addressed over thirteen million people.
He was absolutely certain that Christ could not be "excluded from human history in any part of the globe, from any latitude or longitude of the earth." As he was traveling to Latin America he was asked what he was bringing with him. His ready answer was, "I bring faith. Isn't that enough?" After kissing the soil of Africa in Zaire he exclaimed, “I come to you as a pastor, a servant of Jesus Christ.... I come as a man of faith, a messenger of peace and of hope.”
Influencing the Moulders of Modern Culture with the Gospel
John Paul II considered himself, not merely a pastor to the Catholic community, not merely a leader for the Christian world, but a spokesperson for humanity. His concerns were those of the entire humanity justice, peace, reconciliation, life, family, development, politics, human rights, economy, culture. He thought that the age for using diplomacy as a means of exerting Church influence on society was over, and that it was far more purposeful to dialogue with the moulders and shapers of the culture by which people lived their day to day lives. It was his special delight to interact with intellectuals: historians, philosophers, writers, scientists, poets, artists, musicians. He considered such an exchange of vaster consequence in the long run than trying to humour highly placed political leaders who had their own vested interests. From 1983 he held seminars for Christians, Jewish, agnostic, and atheistic philosophers, historians and other scholars at Castel Gandolfo, always eager to listen to them. He kept learning. He had always been an ardent student. In his younger days, he was considered to be too much of a philosopher to make any difference in actual life. Cardinal Wyszynski, a man of impressive political skill, thought Wojtyla too theoretical to be of consequence.
As a bishop, Wojtyla would take two briefcases of books on his pastoral tours. The writings of Marx, Lenin and Stalin stood on his shelf side by side with Christian classics. He thought it important to know the mind of the ‘Other’, even of an opponent, in order to enter into an intelligent conversation with him or her. For Wojtyla, dialogue was an orderly search for truth, not a denial of one's convictions. He was a learner all the time. It has his habit to ask questions and be an attentive listener. Every school of thought was of immense interest to him. However, his ultimate aim was to bring all that he learned to the service of the Gospel. Did not Paul said, “I take every thought captive and make it obey Christ”? (2 Cor 10:5)
Bringing the Gospel to Public Life
The new Pope, who has been an athlete and a sportsman, showed that ideas need not necessarily remain sterile, but can turn into institutions and movements changing the direction of history. He made it evident that the Gospel generates power. It was with the spiritual energies that sacred Liturgy provided and the commitment that the Christian message elicited that he strengthened Poland's national determination in her struggle for freedom. He proved that faith in the dignity and worth of the human person which the Scriptures inspired could have vast political consequences. While he discouraged priests and religious from getting directly involved in politics, he wanted the resources of the Gospel message to be brought to the regeneration of political life and transformation of society.
In the economic field, the Church leader from Eastern Europe did not believe in any kind of equality imposed from above or forced upon each other from below. His Christian convictions urged him to work for fairness to all, beginning with the weakest. While he consistently supported movements for justice and freedom in Eastern Europe, he advocated a peaceful approach. He insisted that pressure for reform be strong enough to bring about the desired transformation, but gradual enough to ensure a peaceful transition. In this he succeeded. With utmost skill he combined human prudence with evangelical boldness. As he guided Poland to freedom through a bloodless revolution the world stood in amazement. He proved that what seemed impossible was possible. He was convinced that only a peaceful struggle for freedom was in keeping with the spirit of the Gospel. Other countries were to follow the lead of Poland.
An actor turned pontiff, John Paul II lent his voice to victims of oppression, injustice or inequality even in distant parts of the world. He is wrongly pictured as opposing “Liberation Theology”. In fact, all his life-activity was centred round a mission of liberation. What he actually did was to point out the limitations of a method of social analysis closely linked with a system that had failed. Further, his option for the poor was never partisan. It was not exclusive. His struggle against injustice did not include violence. He did not believe in a "political Jesus, a revolutionary, the subversive from Nazareth."
What was outstanding in Wojtyla was his passion for the human person and his capacity to uncover the 'spiritual dimension of history', thus offering a powerful alternative to the false humanism of our times. Of him Cardinal Siri said, “John Paul II has revived the religious sense of the world.”
Announcing a Gospel of Peace, Reconciliation, Love, Life
Having lived through the bloodiest war in human history, this ardent fighter for freedom grew up to be a champion of peace. He had witnessed too much of bloodshed. He invoked God's love even in his most 'revolutionary' speeches in Poland. He had seen the power that hatred possessed to destroy persons and ruin communities. He had seen how fast certain theories and ideologies translated themselves into irrational violence. That is why he consistently refused to give any theological support or philosophical backing to justice struggles in any shape which condoned violence. He consistently taught that the Church's primary task was the formation of consciences, not political scheming.
On November 6, 1982, John Paul II spoke to young people “who let themselves be tempted by materialistic and violent ideologies... Violence is no way to build up. It offends God.” He told the Christians of Lebanon, “I ask that this fratricidal combat be suspended at once” (February 6, 1990). And suspended it was. In Ireland he pleaded. “On my knees I beg you to turn away from the paths of violence and to return to the ways of peace.” Addressing the Christians of ex-Yugoslavia, where Croatians, Serbs, Catholics, Orthodox and Muslims have lived side by side, he said, “Our faith tells us that we cannot be happy without each other, and much less, against each other” (October 17, 1995.). In Tunisian he cried in 1996, “No one may kill in the name of God; no one may cause the death of a brother.” In Nigeria he echoed the same message. He wrote to Saddam Hussein counseling wisdom before conflict. He wrote to President Bush reminding him that he would be responsible to history for the consequences of the war he was initiating.
This amazing man, who had experienced Nazi and Soviet violence in his youthful days, pleaded for peace in the name of Christ. He urged the shunning of violence in the name of humanity. Consequently John Paul II’s words had a universal appeal. He represented the conscience of the world pressing for a peaceful solution to the most vexing of human problems. He agonized in behalf of the human family when he saw hatred in action. He feared for its future. He held love, which necessarily included sacrifice, at the personal level, in the family context, and amidst political and social complexities, to be the key to the solution of all human anxieties. "Do not be afraid of love that places clear demand on people. These demands... are precisely capable of making your love a true love." For him the Gospel meant love. In Mother Teresa, he thought, it had taken a human form. He cultivated that Living Icon carefully.
It would seem that it was humanity's instinct for survival that gave eloquence to John Paul II when he spoke in defence of life. Respect for human life from the earliest moment of its existence was his constant message. Abortions and infanticide were for him comparable to the Holocaust. He readily risked unpopularity and direct opposition in order to rescue human society from a ‘gospel of death’. He was intent on building up a ‘civilization of love’.
He anguished over the thought of the older Christian societies distancing themselves from the teaching of the Church and gradually aging and declining. Such a painful situation rued him to make a direct approach to youth with a ‘Gospel of Hope’. And he succeeded to a great extent.
Reaffirmation of Christian Roots
The fast secularising culture of the traditionally Christian countries worried the great Pontiff, but he always remained optimistic and confident; for he had perfect faith in the power of the Gospel. He would remind France that she was the first daughter of the Church and should be true to her baptismal promises. He would remind Italy of her Catholic soul, her favourite devotions, shrines, family culture; her institutions, architecture, art and literature so reminiscent of her deep-rooted Catholic identity. He pointed out to developed nations too full of self-confidence, how modern society, so excessively boastful of its ‘coming of age’, increased autonomy, adulthood, and confidence in progress was not moving into the new millennium showing signs of diffidence, fear, uncertainty about the future, lacking in self-worth. He proposed: “At the end of the millennium we must make an examination of conscience: where we are, where Christ has brought us, where we have deviated from the Gospel” (November 2,1993).
He told the Slavs that the unity of the Slav nations was not socialism, but their common faith. Poles, Croats, Slovenes, Bulgarians, Moravians, Slovaks, Czechs, Serbs, Russians and Lithuanians had all received the same baptism. That historically significant event provided the desired bond, and it would be unshakable. He called for the abandonment of the Stalinist concept of Eastern and Western Europe, and prayed that the one united Europe should have a ‘soul’. He had no doubt that it would be the Christian faith that could breathe a soul into that political grouping. It was his deep sense of history and profound understanding of cultural and religious symbolisms that made him declare Sts. Cyril and Methodius co-patrons of Europe. For most people, it was merely a concession to eastern sentiments. For John Paul II, who understood the culture -forming nature of evangelisation, it was "giving back to east central Europe their history and culture." He wished Christian images to become once again the “primary symbols of rebirth and cultural integrity.”
Untiring Evangelizer
A missionary strategist of the highest calibre, John Paul II sincerely believed that the Gospel must be preached to all people around the globe. He loved Africa where Christianity grew fastest during the last one century. He had high regard for the ancient civilization of Asia, and profound respect for the religious seriousness of India. Christ belonged to them too, he was sure. He exclaimed on Radio Veritas, "Christ and his Church cannot be alien to any people, nation, or culture." His face would brighten up when he spoke of India or China. He was equally interested in the smaller countries as well. He would ask eagerly about Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Nepal, Bhutan, Afghanistan. He maintained a 'geography' of prayer that ignored no one on any part of the planet. Christ belonged to all. He insisted that everyone had a right to listen to God's saving message. He was certain that it was the bounded duty of the Church to propose the truths she believed in, but never to impose.
John Paul's profound Christian faith did not make him sectarian. For him radical faith in Christ meant radical commitment to humanity and a deep sense of responsibility for everyone who is born into the world. He felt that Christianity had something very important to offer to human society and that the Church had an irreplaceable role to play in shaping its ultimate destiny; for, he believed, she always stood for absolute values. He predicted a “great springtime for Christianity” and saw its first signs. He urged young people to “go out in the streets and into public places like the first apostles” to announce the Good News. He was confident that the younger generation was finding a meaning in Christianity that the earlier one had missed. Young people crowded to meet him, four to five million in Manila, possibly the biggest crowd in human history. Despite criticism, his writings were widely welcomed. Over eight million copies of the Cathechism of the Catholic Church, which he brought out to make the Christian message intelligible to the average person, were sold-out within a brief peiod of its publication.
This Slav Pope from Poland has a prophetic personality. The prayer meeting for peace he held at Assisi with the leaders of other religions stunned the world. His deft use of symbols was more eloquent than words: olive branches, flame of peace, rituals of purification, doves into the air, lighted torches, joined hands, fraternal embrace. When he spoke of Auschwitz, Hiroshima or Nagasaki there was something mystically intriguing about what he was saying. He had a profound sense of history and culture, and knew how to play on the chord of human heart. He sought forgiveness for the historic injuries that Christians had inflicted on others and readily gave forgiveness. When he intervened on occasions of disasters and natural calamities, his words and gestures had an ethereal quality; he seemed to point to eternal realities. In Africa he referred to African values: reverence for ancestors, respect for mothers and children, social solidarity. In Latin America he spoke of the dignity and rights of oppressed people. Addressing indigenous communities right round the world, he admired the wisdom of their ancients and the beauty of their cultures. For him, God was never far from any people.
One of the longest ruling popes in history, John Paul II had a prophetic vision of the future. His immediate appeal to the youth even in his aging years revealed his unexplainable ability to come on the wavelength of the rising generation. When he started calling the continental synods, he was setting in motion a process of identity-formation, cultural maturation, and theological reflection in context. By trying to give attention to sanctity in various parts of the world and declaring saints from different nations, cultural zones, ethnic groups, religious bodies and walks of life, he was telling the world that everyone is called to holiness. Though intellectually bent, he encouraged popular devotions. Being deeply involved in human affairs, he was meticulously eager to preserve the sense of the sacred in Church's official worship. While supporting old religious congregations, he had an eye for new ones that showed special attachment to the Church. While emphasizing the formation of the clergy and religious, he carefully followed up various ecclesial movements, whose spiritual energy he wished to tap. For him theologising did not start at the Christian intellectual's desk, but from the Christian believer's faith-experience. History had indicated to him that this average believer would be the evangeliser of tomorrow, not necessarily the desk-bound professional Christian thinker.
“Do not afraid of presenting Christ to someone who does not yet know him,” he would say; “Christ is the true answer, the most complete answer…” (World Day of Youth 1992).
God was his Sole Interlocutor
Despite his intensive activity around the world, despite his interactions with millions of believers, admirers, friends, acquaintances and co-workers, John Paul II had only one intimate: God. He spent long hours before Him. Christ was his sole interlocutor. It was with him he solved his problems, he set nations free, stirred millions into a love for life. "In the absence of deep inner life, a priest will imperceptibly turn into an office clerk," Wojtyla had confided to a fellow seminarian. He himself didn't, he turned into the most powerful witness to the Gospel in our times.
His unfailing message was, “Let yourselves be charmed by Christ, the Infinite who appeared among you in visible and imitable form. Let yourselves be attracted by his example, which has changed the history of the world and directed it toward an exhilarating goal. Let yourselves be loved by the love of the Holy Spirit, who wishes to turn you away from worldly things, to begin in you the life of the new self, created in God's way in righteousness and true holiness.”
“Fall in love with Jesus Christ, to live his very life, so that our world may have life in the light of the Gospel” (I discepoli, November 1, 1991).
Source: Vidyajyoti, Journal of Theological Reflection, Volume 69, No. 5.
達賴喇嘛對教宗若望保祿二世，
達拉姆撒拉，二○○五年四月三日稱：達賴喇嘛昨天在他三個星期證法的最後講話，特別為聖座教宗若望保祿二世祈禱。在教宗若望保祿二世謝世之後，達賴喇嘛致上這一封哀悼的信函。
「聖座教宗若望保祿二世是一個我非常尊敬的人士。他是個有決心並且是個有很深的靈修素養的人，對他，我有高度的尊敬與欽佩。他在波蘭的經驗，那時正是一個共產黨政權的國家，和我自己與共產黨政權之間的困難，正給與我們兩人一個立即的共同基礎。我們第一次見面。他給我的印象，是一個務實和開放的人，並富有對全球問題博大認知的人。我毫不懷疑地認定他是一位偉大的精神領袖。
「從一開始，我們之間就發展出我們個人緊密的友誼，這是在許多後來其他的場合上受到證實的。我發現，我們在許多的議題上都有完全一致的看法。教宗感覺到一如我所做的，作為一個人，我們不能只追求物質方面的發展，而且我們也需要靈修。當然，物質方面的便利之成就，給與我們肉體上的慰藉，但我們也有唯一理性或心智，這是純物質的供應無法完全滿足的。為我而言，無論是在公開場合或個人方面，教宗常是一直強調棈神價值的重要性，而我們分享同一個關切之事，就是年輕的一代卻在自我迷失中。
「我們也一致贊同，需要在各不同的宗教傳統間，推動和諧。在他的邀請下，我榮幸地參加在亞細細舉行的各宗教間的聚會，這是一件非常重要並深具意義的事件。這事表現給全世界團體看，我們各種不同的傳統真的能夠一起祈禱，並在一個台上發出一項和平的訊息。
「我對教宗要把和平帶給世界的使命，有很深刻的讚賞。儘管在年歲上的增長和身體健康的衰弱，他那罔顧一切的努力地去訪問世上各個不同的地區，並與當地的居民相會以推動和諧和精神價值，不僅只見證他深度的關切，而且也見證他要完成此事所帶來的勇氣。
「教宗對西藏問題深具憐憫和體諒。當然，作為一個團體的領袖，想要設法與中國建立良好的關係，並嚴肅地關切在中國上千萬的基督信徒的環境，他不可能公開或官方形式表達這個問題。但從我們建立友誼一開始，他私自向我透露，他非常了解西藏人民的問題，因為他在波蘭親自經驗到了共產主義。這給了我個人一個很大的鼓勵。
「最後，我要表達我對教宗寬恕的能力甚至對那要暗殺他的人的寬恕，感到極為深刻的欽佩。這是一個清楚的說明，他是一位真正的靈修精神的開創者。」
資訊來源：http://www.beliefnet.com/stony/164/story-16407 .html
The Dalai Lama Expresses Admiration For Pope John Paul II’s
Efforts For Peace, Interfaith Relations,
And Spiritual Values
Dharamsala, 3 April 2005: His Holiness the Dalai Lama offered special prayers for His Holiness Pope John Paul II yesterday during the last leg of his three-week teachings. After the passing away of His Holiness Pope John Paul II, His Holiness the Dalai Lama issued this condolence message.
“His Holiness Pope John Paul II was a man I held in high regard. He was a determined and deeply spiritual minded person for whom I had great respect and admiration. His experience in Poland, then a communist country, and my own difficulties with communists, gave us an immediate common ground. The first time we met, he struck me as very practical and open, with a broad appreciation of global problems. I have no doubt that he was a great spiritual leader.
“Right from the beginning a close personal friendship developed between us, which was confirmed on several subsequent occasions. I found we were in complete agreement about several issues. The Pope felt as I do that as human beings we not only require material development but we also need spirituality. Certainly, improved material facilities provide us with physical comfort but we also have unique intelligence or mind that mere material provision cannot fully satisfy. Both in public and to me in person the Pope always stressed the importance of spiritual values and we shared a concern that the younger generation is losing interest in them.
“We were also in complete agreement about the need to promote harmony amongst different religious traditions. I was privileged to participate in the inter-faith meeting held at Assisi, a very important and significant event, at his invitation. It demonstrated to the world community that our different traditions really could pray together and send a message of peace from one platform.
“I also have deep appreciation for the Pope's mission to bring peace to the world. In spite of increasing age and declining physical health, his relentless efforts to visit different parts of the world and meet the people who lived there to promote harmony and spiritual values, exemplified not only his deep concern but also the courage he brought to fulfilling it.
“The Pope was very sympathetic to the Tibetan problem. Of course, as the head of an institution trying to establish good relations with China and seriously concerned about the status of millions of Christians in China, he could not express this publicly or officially. But right from the start of our friendship, he revealed to me privately that he had a clear understanding of the Tibetan problem because of his own experience of communism in Poland. This gave me great personal encouragement.
“Finally, I want to express my deep admiration for the Pope's ability to forgive even his would-be-assassin. This was a clear indication that he was a true spiritual practitioner.”
Source: http://www.beliefnet.com/story/164/story_16407.html
2005.11.1更新