亞歷山大派從俄利根到亞他拿修救恩論的轉變－畢加論文之再思

THE CHANGE OF ALEXANDRIAN SOTERIOLOGY FROM ORIGEN TO ATHANASIUS-A Reconsideration of D. B. Brakke's Thesis

吳國傑(Nathan K. Ng)

《建道學刊》 22期 (2004/07) Pp. 137-157

摘要

俄利根和亞他拿修神學思想的關係，素為各學者所爭議。早期學者多專注他們思想上的延續性，近代學者則多強調其分歧。受當代研究趨勢影響，畢加力言亞他拿修大幅修改了俄利根的救恩論傳統，以道德元素取代原有的理性追求。畢加將這項轉變歸因於政治理由，認為亞他拿修意圖藉此建立一個包容性廣的屬靈觀，使不同人士都能舒適穩妥地留在教會。本文嘗試重新檢視此問題，並論證亞他拿修只是將物質元素附加於原來的理性主題；靈知仍是他救恩論的核心。他這樣做並非只為政治理由，幾乎所有亞氏系統與俄利根的差異，均可追溯到他對尼西亞基督論的持守，和因之放棄的層階式宇宙觀和靈魂先存論。事實上，若我們仔細比較兩位教父的屬靈教導，差異並非如想像般巨大。畢加的宣稱值得商榷。

並列摘要

The relationship between the theological system of Origen and that of Athanasius has long been a scholarly debate. While most scholars in the past focused their attention on the continuity of Origen's and Athanasius's thoughts, modern scholars on the other hand emphasize the distinction. Following this modern trend, D. B. Brakke argued that Athanasius, who had altered the Origenist tradition radically. Brakke attributed this alteration to political reasons. He argued that Athanasius sought to articulate an ascetic spirituality that was inclusive of people of great different social roles so that all might stay in his church comfortably and stably. This article tries to re-examine Brakke's thesis and argues that Athanasius only supplemented the original intellectual theme with physical elements. Divine knowledge remains the center of his soteriology. Instead of taking political reasons into consideration, nearly all deviations of Athanasius' system from that of Origen can be traceable to his adoption of the Nicene Christology, and the subsequent abandonment of the hierarchical cosmology and the pre-existence of the soul. Indeed, if one compares carefully the spiritual teachings of Origen with that of Athanasius, one will see that the difference is not that great. Brakke's claim is not acceptable.