川普的神學
The Theology of Trump
作者：Michael Horton 譯者：駱鴻銘
我不是個從政者，而是個教導神學的牧者。身為這個偉大共和國的國民，我對內政和外交政策有自己的信念，但這些信念並不足以使我躋身於政治專家和權威的行列裡。不過，我有資格討論這個題目，即川普為什麼在自認為「福音派的選民」當中會得到這麼多的支持，以及這對許多美國教會（而不是對這個國家）來說，究竟是什麼意思。I am not
a politician, but a minister who teaches theology. As a citizen of this great
republic, I have convictions about domestic and foreign policy, but none of
that qualifies me to join the fray of political experts and pundits. I am
qualified, however, to engage the topic of significant support among
self-identified “evangelical voters” for Donald Trump and what this means, not
for the country but what it suggests about significant segments of the US
church.
儘管對其他候選人進行神學分析，對支持他們的福音派跟隨者來說，也同樣是在作許多令人不安的假設，但是沒有人像川普一樣，和福音派這個字有這麼大的認同度。追隨川普的許多自認為福音派的人士，他們對川普的忠誠，特別令許多人感到驚訝。While a
theological analysis of other candidates would suggest many equally troubling
assumptions of their evangelical followers, no candidate is more identified with the word evangelical as is Trump. The loyalty of his
self-identified evangelical followers is especially startling to many.
容我主張，川普和基督教會之間的薄弱關聯是他偶爾會出現在紐約大理石教堂（Marble Collegiate
Church）。這間教堂在過去52年，因其牧師皮爾（Norman Vincent Peale）而廣為人知。皮爾在1952年出版的《積極思考的力量》（The Power of Positive Thinking），是一本融合了大眾心理學和靈性學的著作，在紐約時報暢銷書排行榜上盤踞了186週之久。皮爾的綽號是「上帝的推銷員」，他被人批評為把基督信仰變得無關緊要。尼布爾（Reinhold Niebuhr）曾說，他「敗壞了福音」，因為他幫助人「感覺良好，然而實際上他們是在逃避人生真正的問題。」Let me
suggest that the slender thread connecting Trump to the church is his
occasional holiday appearances at Marble Collegiate Church, made famous by its
pastor for 52 years, Norman Vincent Peale. Blending pop-psychology and
spirituality, Peale’s The Power of Positive Thinking (1952) remained on The New York Times bestsellers list for 186 weeks. Nicknamed “God’s Salesman,”
Peale was criticized for trivializing Christianity. Reinhold Niebuhr said that
he “corrupts the gospel,” and that he helps people “feel good, while they are
evading the real issues of life.”
在1952年的總統選舉裡，皮爾宣稱總統候選人史蒂文森（Adlai Stevenson）不適任總統，因為他曾經離過婚。對他來說，史蒂文森曾諷刺地說道，「以基督徒的身份發言，我覺得使徒保羅很有魅力，而皮爾卻很可怕。」在1960年甘乃迪-尼克森的選戰中（這個選戰開啟了他和尼克森主政的白宮的長久關係），皮爾宣稱，「面對要選舉一個天主教徒，我們的文化實在岌岌可危。」In the
1952 election, Peale declared presidential candidate Adlai Stevenson unfit
because he was divorced. For his part, Stevenson quipped, “Speaking as a
Christian, I find Paul appealing and Peale appalling.” During the Kennedy-Nixon
campaign, which began his long relationship with the Nixon White House, Peale
declared, “Faced with the election of a Catholic, our culture is at stake.”
川普的父母每個禮拜都拖家帶口地去聆聽皮爾的講道，川普經常回憶這對他人生的影響。他和他的姐妹們都是由皮爾證婚的。Trump’s
parents attended Peale’s sermons each week with the family in tow, and Donald
often recalls the impact on his life. He and
his sisters were married by Peale.
近幾年，約爾·歐斯丁（Joel Osteen）也同樣倡導「感覺良好」的福音，他稱川普是「我們教會的好友」，「一個好人」。川普曾在推特上這樣說到，「和約爾作朋友實在是我的榮幸——他是個很棒的人！」A more
recent exponent of a feel-good gospel, Joel Osteen, has called Donald Trump “a
friend of our ministry” and “a good man.” Trump has previously tweeted, “Being associated with Joel is my great
honor—he’s a fantastic man!”
因此在最近幾個月，當川普似乎吸引了一大群的福音派人士時，其實並不像一些媒體的騷動所主張的那麼令人感到意外。自由大學（Liberty University）的校長法威爾（Jerry Falwell Jr.）擁戴川普，說他是「我們這個時代最有遠見的人之一」，也是一個很好的基督徒弟兄，「讓我想到我的父親」。基督教廣播網（CBN）的創辦人帕特羅伯遜（Pat Robertson），在和這位建立帝國者（empire-builder）的一場會談中裝腔作勢地說到，「你啟發了我們所有的人」。達拉斯第一浸信會的牧師羅伯特‧傑佛瑞（Robert Jeffress）在多場競選大會上說，「我們需要一位強大的領導者，一個解決問題的人，因此許多基督徒對選舉一個偏世俗的候選人，持著開放立場。」So when
in recent months, it has appeared that Trump appeals to a sizable group of
evangelicals, it may be less surprising than all the hoopla suggests. Liberty
University president Jerry Falwell Jr. hailed him as “one of the
greatest visionaries of our time” and a wonderful Christian brother “who
reminds me of my dad.” The redoubtable Pat Robertson gushed in an interview
with the empire-builder, “You inspire us all.” Robert Jeffress, pastor of First
Baptist Church in Dallas, who has introduced Trump at rallies, says, “We need a
strong leader and a problem-solver, hence many Christians are open to a more secular
candidate.”
在教義上模糊不清，被消費主義所滲透，以及一種感性的道德主義，想要幫助我們眾人「成為一個更好的你」，也對「家庭價值」抱著某種興趣——只要這些價值不會干涉我們自己家庭的解體，許多文化福音派人士對打了許多文化戰爭的敗仗而感到厭煩。他們需要一個贏家——「一位強大的領袖」。這正是造就蠱惑人心的政客所需要的言論，然而我卻不是第一個指出這點的人。Vague
on doctrine, infiltrated by consumerism and a sentimental moralism intent on
helping us all “become a better you,” and sort of interested in “family values”
as long as they don’t interfere with our own family breakdowns, many cultural
evangelicals are tired of losing the culture wars. They want a winner—“a strong
leader.” I’m hardly the first to point out that
it’s the stuff of which demagogues are made.
在部分所謂「福音派選舉人團」當中造成這種轉變的，並不是川普本人。相反，是川普的候選資格，揭露出這個運動很大一部分所具有的內在世俗化，而這是許多民意調查在過去一段時間已經證實的。我們可以用四個神學字眼來凸顯這個問題。t is
not that Trump has caused this transformation in portions of the so-called
“evangelical electorate.” Rather, his candidacy has revealed the inner
secularization of significant portions of the movement, which surveys have
documented for some time now. Four
theological words highlight the problem.
1. 創造。川普揭露出許多福音派人士已經接受了一種新的創造論。這種創造論說，國家必須符合一些基本人權，而不是承認人的尊嚴來自人擁有上帝的形象。因此，他們支持虐待囚犯（也許包括他們的親人）是合法的國家政策；對一些人來說，這是完全合理的，因為在對恐怖分子進行一場無止境的戰爭的處境下，這是必要的。不必理會基督徒正義戰爭的傳統，而這是多少世紀以來，西方思想的基礎。即使他最近對三K黨模棱兩可的聲明也沒有能減少對他的支持，川普揭露出美國人誠實面對種族歧視仍是一項未竟的事業，這也是一部分福音派人士所清楚反映出來的問題。
1. Creation. Trump reveals that many evangelicals
have come to embrace a new doctrine of creation, according to which the state
accords basic rights instead of recognizing their dignity as fellow
image-bearers of God. Hence, the support of the torture of human beings (and
perhaps their relatives) as legitimate state policy; this is entirely justified
to some by the circumstances of an unlimited war on terror. Never mind the
Christian just-war tradition that has undergirded centuries of Western
reflection. And given the apparent failure of even his most recent ambiguous
statements about the KKK to diminish support among his base, Trump reveals that
America’s unfinished task of wrestling honestly with racism is just as clearly
mirrored in some parts of evangelicalism.
2. 罪。川普揭露出許多福音派人士已經接受了一種不同於過去的福音派對於罪的觀念。首先，罪現在很少被視為是一種使我們在聖潔的上帝面前，成為「可憐的冒犯者」的景況，而是被視為好人所犯的、沒有對「活出美好」（our best life now；譯按：對Joel Osteen的一本暢銷書名的影射）作出貢獻的錯誤。當川普宣布說，他從來不曾求上帝赦免他，因為他沒有作過什麼值得他向上帝尋求赦免的事的時候，典型的福音派信徒早就應該明白這點了。從一個基督徒的觀念來看，在許多層面上，這種說法是大有問題的。
2. Sin. Trump reveals that many evangelicals have come to embrace a
different idea of sin than evangelicals have in the past. First, sin is now
seen less a condition that renders us all “miserable offenders” before a holy
God than mistakes good people make that fail to contribute to “our best life
now.” Card-carrying evangelicals should have gotten it when Trump announcedthat he has never asked God for forgiveness
because he doesn’t really do anything that would require it. This is
problematic from a Christian perspective on several levels.
首先，即使我們把罪（一種光景）簡化為罪行，這也已經把多次離婚，支持墮胎產業，不是任何教會的會友，毫不掩飾地委身於一種「我最大」的倫理觀排除在外。川普所獲得的廣大福音派支持暗示說，我們現在對這些做法不會在意——它們是正常的。
First, even if we were to reduce sin (a condition) to sins, the latter
no longer include multiple divorces, significant past support of the abortion
industry, lack of any church membership, and unabashed dedication to a “Me
First” ethic. Widespread evangelical support suggests that we’re fine with
these practices now—they’re normal.
其次，甚至更令人感到困惑的，「罪人」現在很顯然是「其他人」，是那些他們的存在本身就會讓我們感到害怕、感到被剝削的人。把我們自己的罪轉移到其他人身上，我們就提供了一個基礎，使任何蠱惑人心的政客都可以團結「我們的同類」，而把自義的怒氣發在「非我族類」的人身上。
Second, and even more troubling, “sinners” are now apparently the
“others” whose very presence makes us feel afraid and disenfranchised.
Deflecting sin from ourselves to others, we have helped to provide a foundation
for whatever demagogue can rally people “like us” to self-righteous anger
against outsiders.
3. 基督。耶穌已經變成一個商標和文化政治的吉祥物。「福音派」在過去的意思是「從各族、各方、各民、各國」（啟五9）而來的普世群體，靠著「一主，一信，一洗」（弗四5），藉著唯獨信靠耶穌作為全能的救主，得以脫離我們的罪所配得的定罪和死亡，而聯合成為一體。我們最終的身分是「在基督裡」。這會遠勝我們身為美國人的身分，或民主黨或共和黨的身分。但是川普提醒我們，今天許多自稱為福音派人士的人，發現他們最終的忠誠是在一個越來越多元化的社會裡，保存或重新獲得一個已經失去的社經、文化，甚至是種族的霸權。藉著這福音，基督對我們最深沉的需要說話，要我們與祂聯合，並在祂的身體裡與其他人聯合。
3. Christ. Jesus has become a brand and
cultural-political mascot. The term “evangelical” used to mean that the global
community of those “from every tribe, tongue, and nation” (Rev. 5:9) were
united by “one Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Eph. 4:5) through faith in Christ
alone as the all-sufficient Savior from the condemnation and death that our
sins deserve. Our ultimate demographic is “in Christ.” This trumps (no pun
intended) our identity as Americans, or as Democrats and Republicans. But Trump
reminds us that many who call themselves evangelicals today find their ultimate
loyalty in preserving or regaining a lost socio-political and cultural, perhaps
even racial, hegemony in an increasingly diverse society. By his gospel, Christ
speaks to our deepest need to be united to him and to each other in his body.
4. 領導力。川普揭露出，對許多福音派人士來說，「敬虔的領導力」顯然是在歌頌自戀、貪婪，以及為了在追逐權力時的騙術。他們喜歡川普「強有力的領導」，以及「完成工作」的能力。他們最看重的似乎是實用主義。
4. Leadership. Trump reveals that “godly leadership”
is apparently for some evangelicals the celebration of narcissism, greed, and
deceitfulness in the pursuit of power. They like Trump’s “strong leadership”
and ability to “get things done.” They seem to value pragmatism over anything else.
對比而言，在約翰福音（十三章）裡，耶穌演出了一個關於權力的「行動比喻」，這個比喻會在祂即將到來的受死和復活中得到證明。祂脫了衣服，拿一條手巾束腰，開始洗祂門徒的腳，以預備逾越節的晚餐。彼得曾一再地轉移焦點，從耶穌身上轉到自己身上。他曾經多次斥責耶穌，因為耶穌一再提到祂就要被釘十字架。粗暴的彼得如今抗議到，「你永不可洗我的腳！」耶穌回答說：「我若不洗你，你就與我無分了。」在這段經文中，「脫了」和「穿上」衣服這個動詞，和耶穌在約翰福音第十章所用的，是同一個動詞：「沒有人奪我的命去，是我自己捨的。我有權柄捨了，也有權柄收回來。」
By contrast, in the Gospel of John (chapter 13), Jesus enacts a
“performance parable” about power as will be demonstrated in his coming death
and resurrection. Taking off his outer garment, he wraps a towel around his
waist and begins to wash his disciples’ feet in preparation for the Passover
meal. Repeatedly, Peter had taken the spotlight off of Jesus and put it on
himself. He had rebuked Jesus several times for bringing up his impending
crucifixion. And now the boisterous Peter protests, “You will never wash my
feet!” Jesus replies, “Unless I wash you, you have no part with me.” The verbs
for “taking off” and “taking up” his garments in the passage are the same Jesus
used in John 10: “No one takes my life from me. I have authority to lay it down and to take it up again.”
從永世以來，聖子就為這個自我犧牲的行動作好了預備。這是個以血為根基的國度，確定的是，這是國王的血，而不是其臣民的血。靠著這個行動，祂叫上帝的敵人與祂和好，與祂一同成為永恆國度的後嗣。這是福音！作為回應，我們蒙召要捨己來愛人，來領導人，不像「外邦人有君王為主治理他們」（路廿二25）。
From all eternity, the Son had prepared for this act of self-sacrifice.
It’s a kingdom founded in blood, to be sure, but the king’s blood rather than
that of his subjects. And by this act he makes God’s enemies reconciled
co-heirs with him of the everlasting kingdom. This is the gospel! And in
response, we are called to sacrificial love and leadership, in contrast with
“the Gentile rulers who lord it over others” (Luke 22:25).
當然，像美國這樣的外邦人國度（Gentile kingdoms）不在這個救贖恩典的範圍之內。這些國度是由信徒與非信徒所共享的共同國度（common kingdoms），要靠刀劍來維持秩序和治安，並護衛上帝所賜與的權利。但是當基督徒領袖被不敬虔權勢的驚人表達所吸引時，會引發這樣的問題，即他們覺得最吸引人的是哪一個國度，以及哪一種君王。
Of course, Gentile kingdoms like America are not realms of such saving
grace. They are common kingdoms where swords of steel keep order and safety and
defend God-given rights. But when Christian leaders are drawn to breath-taking
expressions of ungodly power, it raises the question about which kingdom and
which sort of king they find most appealing.
簡言之，川普揭露出，對許多福音派人士來說，「福音派」這個字的涵義，有許多人越來越不認為是專屬於基督徒的，更不是專屬於福音派的。再次說，倘若主宰美國宗教精神（American
spirituality）的神學是Christian Smith所提出的「道德主義的、療癒性的自然神論」（moralistic,
therapeutic deism），以及詹姆士（William James）所提出的「實用主義」的組合，那麼川普或許恰恰是眼下最合適的候選人不過了。
Trump reveals, in short, that for many evangelicals, the word evangelicalmeans something that many
increasingly do not recognize as properly Christian, much less evangelical.
Then again, if the working theology of American spirituality is a combination
of “moralistic, therapeutic deism” (Christian Smith) and pragmatism (William
James), then perhaps Donald Trump is after all exactly the right candidate for
the moment.
Michael Horton is J. G. Machen Professor of
Theology at Westminster Seminary California, host of the White Horse Inn, and
the author of Core Christianity: Finding Yourself in God’s Story.