神学对接种、种痘和麻醉剂应用的反对

蝴蝶的语言

神学对接种、种痘和麻醉剂应用的反对

讨论一下现代医学最非凡的斗争之一。早在上个世纪，布瓦耶（Boyer）就引入了法国预防天花的接种法，英国一些有头脑的医生，在蒙塔古夫人和梅特兰的鼓舞下也以他为榜样。英吉利海峡两岸医学界的极端保守分子立即感到非常吃惊，神学很快找到了反对这种新实践的各种深层理由。索邦神学院的法国神学家们对它进行了严正的谴责；在英国神学家中，叫喊得最凶的代表人物是爱德华·梅西牧师，他在1772年做了一次布道，题目是：《危险的和罪孽深重的接种法》（The Dangerous andSinful Practice of Inoculation），后来又以书的形式把它出版了。在这一布道中，他断言，约伯的瘟热大概就是融合性的天花；毫无疑问，魔鬼给他接种了；这种疾病是上帝为惩罚罪孽而传播的；所提议的对它们的预防的尝试，是“一种魔鬼的手术”。牧师德拉费耶先生的布道也同样慷慨激昂，他的布道的题目是：《接种与不可饶恕的实践》（Inoculation and Indefensible Prac tice）。这场战斗持续了30年。我们很高兴地看到，有些神职人员，其中包括伍斯特的主教马多克斯，在这场战斗中站在了正确理性的一边。但是到了1753年，坎特伯雷的一位著名的教区长在这座宗教圣城的布道坛上，对接种进行了谴责，他的许多教友纷纷仿效他。 　　    在信奉新教的苏格兰，也有非常猛烈的攻击。许多牧师加入到谴责者的行列，指责这种新的实践是“公然抗拒上帝”，并且是“想竭力阻挠上帝的审判”。在大洋的我们这一边，对这个问题也只能通过斗争来解决。大约在1721年，波士顿的一位医生扎布迪尔·博伊尔斯顿博士进行了一次接种实验，他自己的儿子是他首批的实验对象之一。他很快遇到了巨大的敌视，以至于这个城市的市政委员禁止他重复这一实验。他的最主要的反对者，是苏格兰医生道格拉斯博士，他得到了医学界和报纸的支持。反对方的歪曲肆无忌惮，他们坚持认为接种就是“使人中毒”，而且他们极力要求当局以谋杀罪对博伊尔斯顿博士进行审讯。在这样为尘世处理了这个事件之后，他们进而要为另一个世界处理这个问题，他们强调，“一个人如果在早上把一家人都传染上了天花，那么他在晚上向上帝祈祷抵御这种疾病就是亵渎”；因为天花是“上帝对这些有罪的人的审判结果”，所以“阻止它只会使他更加愤怒”；“接种是对耶和华的特权的侵犯，因为利用疾病对有罪的人进行侵袭和伤害是他的权力”。在反对使用任何方法治疗任何疾病方面，人们所使用的与这个问题可能最没有关系的《圣经》的众多经文中，有这样一段经文同样得到了首肯——这就是《何西阿书》（Hosea，第6章，第1节）中的这段话：“他撕裂我们，也必医治。他打伤我们，也必缠裹。” 　　    这些反对意见如此激烈，以至于博伊尔斯顿博士的生命都受到了威胁，有人认为晚上出门对他来说是不安全的。由于科顿·马瑟支持了这种新的实践，一只点燃了的手榴弹甚至扔进了他的住宅，这使得另一个献身于这种实践的教士隐藏了起来。许多新英格兰的清教徒神职人员都是博伊尔斯顿最坚定的支持者，应当说，这是他们的荣耀。英克里斯·马瑟和科顿·马瑟是最早表示支持接种的人之一，而正是由科顿·马瑟引起了博伊尔斯顿对接种的注意；在事态的关键时刻，波士顿的六个重要的教士利用他们的影响对博伊尔斯顿一方表示支持，并且和他一起遭到了诽谤。尽管否定者们反应迅速，当面讥笑马瑟家族在巫术方面所起的作用，竭力主张他们在那个问题上的轻信完全可以证明他们在这个问题上也是轻信的，但是，他们坚持了下来——在新英格兰的神职人员为其国家所做出的诸多贡献之中，当然应当记住这一点；这些与博伊尔斯顿和本杰明·富兰克林肩并肩站在一起的人，不得不抵御那些曾打击过欧洲接种支持者的同样武器的进攻——对他们”不忠诚于上帝的天启法则”的指责。 　　    不久，事实就对否定者们予以了非常强有力的反驳，在第一次实验的一年或两年中，在波士顿和邻近的城市有近300人接受了博伊尔斯顿的接种，其中只有6人死亡；而在同一时期，在近6000名自然患天花病并且只接受了通常治疗的人中，有近1000人死亡。即使这时，否定者也没有绝望，在不得不承认接种的成功时，他们又求助于一种新的论据，并且回答说：“在主日把撒旦从他在人类身上的住所中驱赶走是件好事，但是法利赛人的孩子借助别卜西的帮助把他赶走是不正当的。如果我们想无愧于上帝的话，我们必须既要关注我们所做的事，也要关注所产生的结果。”然而，事实是难以辩驳的；尽管反对意见依然激烈，而且基于同样模糊的以《圣经》为依据的理由，这些反对意见持续了20多年，但新的实践在东半球和西半球仍在继续进行。 　　    科学的医学的稳步前进，接下来又给我们带来了詹纳(Jenner）发现的种痘法。而这时，各种模糊的神学思想的残留物又使许多神职人员与退步的医生站在了一起。也许，詹纳的敌人中最恶毒的一个就是他那个专业的一个同行莫塞莱博士。莫塞莱在其著作《牛的传染病》（Lues Bovilla）扉页的卷首语中，提到詹纳及其追随者时说：“天父，请饶恕他们吧，他们不知道他们在做什么”，莫塞莱博士的这部书尤其得到了德罗莫尔（Dromore）的主教的认可。1798年，一些医生和神职人员成立了一个反接种协会，他们号召波士顿人禁止种痘，因为这是“对神本身、甚至是对上帝的意志的挑衅”，并且宣称，“上帝的法律禁止这种实践”。到了1803年，牧师拉姆斯登博士还在剑桥大学的一次布道中，把《圣经》经文与对詹纳的诽谤结合在一起，对种痘进行了厉声斥责；而普伦普特里和牧师罗兰·希尔在英格兰、沃特豪斯在美国、图勒特在法国、萨柯在意大利，以及其他许多善良和真诚的人，则在奋力推进这项事业。最终，科学、人性和正确的理性取得了胜利。最令人瞩目的结果很快出现了。死于这种可怕的灾祸的人数有了令人惊异的下降。在柏林，1783年以后的8年间，死于天花的儿童超过了4000人；而在1814年以后的8年间，在大规模采用了种痘法之后，在更多的死亡人数中，只有535人死于这种病。在维尔茨堡（Wurtemberg），在1772年以后的24年间，所有儿童中有1／13的人死于天花，而在1822年以后的12年间，死于天花的儿童只有1／1600。在哥本哈根，在引入接种牛痘以前的12年间，有5500人死于天花，而在引入接种牛痘以后的16年间，全丹麦只有158人死于此病。在维也纳，过去平均每年因患这种病而死亡的人数超过800人，但是近年来死亡人数在稳步、快速地下降，到了1803年，死亡人数已经减少到低于30人了。伦敦以前也受这种疾病的折磨，但是到了1890年，它的所有居民中只有一人死于这种病。就全世界而言，我们这个时代最受人尊敬的英国医生之一在公告中宣布的统计结果表明，“詹纳在一代人中已经挽救了、现在正在挽救而且在未来所有时代将会挽救的人数，超过了拿破仑的所有战争中死亡的人数”。

在美一方

10# 蝴蝶的语言

不客气，这是我06年最欣赏的一本书。

蝴蝶的语言

7# 长白山

是，昨天在网上看了关于Andrew Dickson White介绍之后，还和乡哥感叹半天呢，现在没网络可不行，在互联网这么发达的今天，某些领域真是让人受益匪浅呢。

蝴蝶的语言

3# 在美一方

谢谢老姐的补充哦！

长白山

接种，牛痘，麻醉都经历过啊，真是幸亏得很。

很羡慕金宝你，老哥或老弟能够一直如此健康，神迹哦。

金宝

谢谢蝴蝶的分享。

幸亏这些“魔鬼的手术”，幸亏基督教不能事事得逞。
长白山 发表于 11.3.2009 10:11

嘿嘿，那天魔鬼给你做个手术，就不幸亏了。

长白山

谢谢蝴蝶的分享。

幸亏这些“魔鬼的手术”，幸亏基督教不能事事得逞。

金宝

作者Andrew White是一个虔诚的基督徒，美国康奈尔大学的创始人之一并任第一任校长。一生反对教会干涉大学的教育和研究。
在美一方 发表于 11.3.2009 04:40

还是基督徒有宽容之心。

在美一方

作者Andrew White是一个虔诚的基督徒，美国康奈尔大学的创始人之一并任第一任校长。一生反对教会干涉大学的教育和研究。

在美一方

2# 蝴蝶的语言

节选自同一本书的第16章

原文：

Theological ``Restatements'' - Final Triumph of Scientific View and Methods

But, happily, long before these latter occurrences, science had come into the field and was gradually diminishing this class of diseases. Among the earlier workers to this better purpose was the great Dutch physician Boerhaave. Finding in one of the wards in the hospital at Haarlem a number of women going into convulsions and imitating each other in various acts of frenzy, he immediately ordered a furnace of blazing coals into the midst of the ward, heated cauterizing irons, and declared that he would burn the arms of the first woman who fell into convulsions. No more cases occurred.

These and similar successful dealings of medical science with mental disease brought about the next stage in the theological development. The Church sought to retreat, after the usual manner, behind a compromise. Early in the eighteenth century appeared a new edition of the great work by the Jesuit Delrio which for a hundred years had been a text-book for the use of ecclesiastics in fighting witchcraft; but in this edition the part played by Satan in diseases was changed: it was suggested that, while diseases have natural causes, it is necessary that Satan enter the human body in order to make these causes effective. This work claims that Satan ``attacks lunatics at the full moon, when their brains are full of humours''; that in other cases of illness he ``stirs the black bile''; and that in cases of blindness and deafness he ``clogs the eyes and ears.'' By the close of the century this ``restatement'' was evidently found untenable, and one of a very different sort was attempted in England.   

In the third edition of the Encyclopæ dia Britannica, published in 1797, under the article Dæ moniacs, the orthodox view was presented in the following words: ``The reality of demoniacal possession stands upon the same evidence with the gospel system in general.''

This statement, though necessary to satisfy the older theological sentiment, was clearly found too dangerous to be sent out into the modern sceptical world without some qualification. Another view was therefore suggested, namely, that the personages of the New Testament ``adopted the vulgar language in speaking of those unfortunate persons who were generally imagined to be possessed with demons.'' Two or three editions contained this curious compromise; but near the middle of the present century the whole discussion was quietly dropped.   

Science, declining to trouble itself with any of these views, pressed on, and toward the end of the century we see Dr. Rhodes at Lyons curing a very serious case of possession by the use of a powerful emetic; yet myth-making came in here also, and it was stated that when the emetic produced its effect people had seen multitudes of green and yellow devils cast forth from the mouth of the possessed.

The last great demonstration of the old belief in England was made in 1788. Near the city of Bristol at that time lived a drunken epileptic, George Lukins. In asking alms, he insisted that he was ``possessed,'' and proved it by jumping, screaming, barking, and treating the company to a parody of the Te Deum.   

He was solemnly brought into the Temple Church, and seven clergymen united in the effort to exorcise the evil spirit. Upon their adjuring Satan, he swore ``by his infernal den'' that he would not come out of the man - ``an oath,'' says the chronicler, ``nowhere to be found but in Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress, from which Lukins probably got it.''   

But the seven clergymen were at last successful, and seven devils were cast out, after which Lukins retired, and appears to have been supported during the remainder of his life as a monument of mercy.   

With this great effort the old theory in England seemed practically exhausted.   

Science had evidently carried the stronghold. In 1876, at a little town near Amiens, in France, a young woman suffering with all the usual evidences of diabolic possession was brought to the priest. The priest was besought to cast out the devil, but he simply took her to the hospital, where, under scientific treatment, she rapidly became better.   

The final triumph of science in this part of the great field has been mainly achieved during the latter half of the present century.   Following in the noble succession of Paracelsus and John Hunter and Pinel and Tuke and Esquirol, have come a band of thinkers and workers who by scientific observation and research have developed new growths of truth, ever more and more precious.   

Among the many facts thus brought to bear upon this last stronghold of the Prince of Darkness, may be named especially those indicating ``expectant attention'' - an expectation of phenomena dwelt upon until the longing for them becomes morbid and invincible, and the creation of them perhaps unconscious. Still other classes of phenomena leading to epidemics are found to arise from a morbid tendency to imitation. Still other groups have been brought under hypnotism. Multitudes more have been found under the innumerable forms and results of hysteria. A study of the effects of the imagination upon bodily functions has also yielded remarkable results.   

And, finally, to supplement this work, have come in an array of scholars in history and literature who have investigated myth-making and wonder-mongering.   Thus has been cleared away that cloud of supernaturalism which so long hung over mental diseases, and thus have they been brought within the firm grasp of science.   

Conscientious men still linger on who find comfort in holding fast to some shred of the old belief in diabolic possession. The sturdy declaration in the last century by John Wesley, that ``giving up witchcraft is giving up the Bible,'' is echoed feebly in the latter half of this century by the eminent Catholic ecclesiastic in France who declares that ``to deny possession by devils is to charge Jesus and his apostles with imposture,'' and asks, ``How can the testimony of apostles, fathers of the Church, and saints who saw the possessed and so declared, be denied?'' And a still fainter echo lingers in Protestant England.   

But, despite this conscientious opposition, science has in these latter days steadily wrought hand in hand with Christian charity in this field, to evolve a better future for humanity. The thoughtful physician and the devoted clergyman are now constantly seen working together; and it is not too much to expect that Satan, having been cast out of the insane asylums, will ere long disappear from monasteries and camp meetings, even in the most unenlightened regions of Christendom.