James Poy Wong 黃培正

"Then, what would a person die for? I would say a person could only die for his own faith. But what is this faith? To most people it is oneself and one’s evaluation of one’s life. In fact, one is not to die for one’s faith, but to live for one’s faith."

"Faith" - 1949

信仰

人的信仰是自己对人生评价的假定吧了，和什么宗教，什么主义都没有根本的关系。 有时觉得某一种宗教和自己的感情相符，某一种主义说出自己想说的话，而且还说得英雄气概点，这都不过是外表上一时的联系，并不是信仰的本身，好像苹果和太阳同样是圆的一样。

因为宗教本意是发自内心的，所以和信仰较为接近。 除了极少数人能够把宗教来做自己的信仰之外，其他大多数所谓教徒都误解了宗教，迷信了宗教，不能为了宗教而死。 今日这种变了本质，只重形式的现象，就是造成宗教衰落的一个原因。 我们常听到某某人的老婆大人要他入了教才肯嫁他时，他就入教了，虽然自从结婚那天给人像呆子布置进了教堂之后，再也不肯踏上教堂的半个阶级。

又有多少人能够真正为主义而死的呢？ 今日主义成了时髦的征象，好像是穿新衣来争取别人称赞一样， 是绝对形式的姿势。 主义本来是一种改良社会，造福人羣的工具，是因人制宜，因时制宜，因地制宜的东西。 世间没有一种力量可以逆阻时代的巨流。 我们今天目睹着一个政治机构的倒塌，寄生在这个机构上的人，现在想藉主义的美名，来驱使人民去护卫他们的统治地位，来保存他们过去所攫夺的利益。 看着他们失了政治作风的死斗，为他们自己而掽命摧毁人民的生计，这能说是为民么？ 国民党今日的困难，并不是主义的失败，完全是给投机者括去了人民最低限度的生存条件。 国民党做错了两件事：第一是不肯实行三民主义；第二是压制了政治活动。 人民如果有了政治思想，又未能有政治行动的时候， 就必定会变成激烈的。 无论那一种行于一个社会的主义，如果犯了同样的错误， 也会遭遇同样的结果。

昨日努力蒙蔽人民的，今天不是走得最远，就是逃出了海外。 他们 天天在叫别人去死，可是他们会最先在对方势力的面前跪下。 他们天天在叫美国拔荷包，但他们躲在美国，连入息税也瞒着不报。 他们天天想着把不附从他们的人一概推向共产党那边去。 他们尽管在安全地区叫得整天价响，有一天他们终会矢口否认现在的所谓 “信仰”。 尽管今天他们在说爱国，有一天他们会自愿做别人的儿子。 这些人借主义来谋一已的私利，搅是非，中伤别人，实行破坏的勾当，不外是一些长大了的破窗顽童吧了。 他们今天跟亚狗打亚猫，明天又跟亚猫赶亚狗。 什么 ”帝国主义” “豆角煮鱼” 都是假的。 他们决不肯口唸三民主义而自杀的。

那么人能够为什么而死呢？ 我说人只能为自己的信仰而死。 这信仰是什么呢？ 一般人的信仰就是他自己和自己对生命的评价。 其实他并不是为信仰而死，他是为信仰而活的。 这信仰的好坏，就在他看重生命的那一面。 人类自来的基本斗争，不外是爱和憎，解放和压迫，快乐和痛苦与人性的冲突。 宗义与主义产生之前是这样，在宗教与主义消失以后，也还是要这样。

当然信仰并非什么崇高不可思议的东西。 信仰无所谓深远，也无所谓简单，它是以人性做指南的。 最近先先尼地有一个八十岁的面包师康尔死了。 早早在他写下遗嘱的时候，他也草拟了自己死后的祭文。 他写着： “康尔先生的宗教非常简单，他爱人类，如果他有所憎恨的话，那就是战争。 康尔先生是一个自由的信仰者，是一个被压迫者的朋友。 他相信唯一的善良就是快乐，唯一的火炬就是理智，唯一的信仰就是正义。 人道就是宗教，爱是他的牧师。” 他常常对朋友说，“ 如果我们好好地打理死前，死后自然会好好地打理自己的。”

所以，信仰是生的信条， 绝不是死的口号。

Faith

A person’s faith is probably a presumption of one’s evaluation of life that has no essential connection to any religion or doctrine. Sometimes one may feel that a certain religion corresponds to one’s feelings, or a doctrine can express what one wants to say in a more heroic spirit. These are all a semblance of connections and are not one’s faith itself, just like an apple and the sun are both round.

Because the real intent of religion is coming from the heart, it is therefore closer to faith. Besides a very few people who are able to take religion as their faith, the vast majority of the so-called worshipers have misunderstood religion with a blind worship and would not die for religion. Today the essence has changed to a phenomenon that places emphasis on ceremony, and that is one of the reasons causing the decline of religion. We have heard about so-and-so wife has insisted that he should become a church member before she will marry him. He then became a member. Although he was being handled like an idiot in the church on the day of his wedding, he was never willing to go on the steps of the church thereafter.

And how many people are there who would really die for certain doctrines? Today, doctrines have become fashionable symbols, like wearing new clothing for the praise of others. This is an absolute pretense of formality. A doctrine is a tool originally intended for improving society and creating happiness for humankind. It is something that should adapt to the needs of people, time, and local conditions. There is no force in this world that can go against the great current of time. We presently witness the collapse of a political institution. Those parasites who are living in this institution now want to rely on the fame of the doctrine to impel people to defend their governing positions in order to protect the interests they seized in the past. Seeing their loss of demeanor over fierce political struggle for their own interests, relentlessly ruining people’s livelihood - Can this be called serving for the people? The difficulty that the Nationalists have today is not due to the failure of their doctrine; it is entirely caused by the opportunists scraping away people’s minimal survival condition. The Nationalists have done wrong in two things: First, they are not willing to implement the Three Principles; Second, they suppress political activities. When people have political ideas but could not hold political actions, they certainly will become radical. No matter which doctrine is being implemented in a society, if those in power commit the same mistakes, they will meet with the same kind of result.

For those who tried hard to deceive people yesterday, they would either have gone far away today or escaped overseas. Everyday, they are telling people to die¹, but they will be the first to kneel down before the opponent’s force. Everyday, they demand Americans to loosen their wallets for them, but they hide in America and don’t even pay income tax. Everyday, they plot about pushing all those who don’t follow them to the side of the Communists. In spite of how they reside in the safe zone and shout to the high heaven, one day they would flatly deny what they now consider as their “faith.” Even though they speak of patriotism today, someday they would be willing to be others’ sons². These people utilize the doctrine to seek their private interests, provoke controversy, asperse others, and commit destructive acts. They are nothing more than some grown-up naughty, window-breaking kids. Today, they mingle with the dog beating up the cat, and tomorrow, they would mingle with the cat chasing away the dog. What they say about “imperialism,” “string beans cook fish”³ is all phony. They definitely would not commit suicide while reciting the Doctrine of the Three Principles.

Then, what would a person die for? I would say a person could only die for his own faith. But what is this faith? To most people it is oneself and one’s evaluation of one’s life. In fact, one is not to die for one’s faith, but to live for one’s faith. As to the good and bad of one’s faith, it depends on which aspect of life that one considers important. The essence of human struggle does not go beyond the scope of love and hate, freedom and oppression, happiness and suffering, and all the conflicts in human nature. This is so before the founding of religion and doctrine, and it will be just the same after the disappearance of religion and doctrine.

No doubt faith is not such a sublime, inconceivable thing. Faith is not about being far-reaching or simplistic. It is navigated by human nature. Recently in Cincinnati an eighty year old baker named Karl died. Long ago when he wrote his will he also drafted his own elegy. He wrote; “Mr. Karl’s religion is very simple. He loves humanity. If there is anything he hates, that is war. Mr. Karl is a believer of freedom. He is a friend of the oppressed. He believes happiness is the only kindness, wisdom is the only torch, and righteousness is the only faith. Humanitarianism is religion, and love is his minister.” He often said to his friends, “If we take care of things before our death, then after death things will naturally take care of themselves.”

Therefore, faith is the tenet of life, definitely not the slogan of death.