拜倫的案頭戲“該隱”以及喀爾文不義的神

Byron's Cain and the Malevolent God of Calvin

本文主旨在於探討拜倫案頭戲《該隱》中一些宗教的概念。拜倫的劇作《該隱》出版於西元1821年。他寫作該劇的動機兼具私人與靈性的層面。本文探究劇中主題時，特別著重於拜倫對於喀爾文主義教條所持的反對立場。拜倫在劇中抨擊一些喀爾文主義的基本概念，尤其是對於「神的護佑」和「無條件的揀選」這兩種概念。在他的詮釋下，上帝在該隱的生命中是缺席的。而事實上，拜倫的劇中並沒有上帝這個角色，這與聖經中對該隱和亞伯故事的描述並不相同。雖然拜倫在劇中承認上帝的存在，但他描寫的上帝在人類離開伊甸園後的世界中，並不積極介入劇中主角的生活。拜倫的寫法因此挑戰了神的護佑的概念。該隱在拜倫的劇中所經歷的上帝是缺席與沉默的，而該隱的其他家人似乎蒙受上帝較多的護佑。這差異顯示出該隱的身份是屬於那在起初就不被揀選的。經由這樣的詮釋，拜倫突顯了「無條件揀選」的不公以及喀爾文主義的獨裁與不義。

This paper explores some of the religious concepts of Byron’s closet drama, Cain. Byron published his poem in 1821. His motivation for writing this play was both personal and spiritual in nature. This paper explores these themes, particularly in regard to the author’s antagonistic relationship to the dogmas of Calvinism. Within the drama, Byron attacks some of the foundational concepts of Calvinism—specifically, the concepts of God’s Providence and Unconditional Election. He does this by depicting God as absent in Cain’s life. In fact, unlike in the biblical account of Cain and Abel, God is not a character in Byron’s poem. While Byron acknowledges God’s existence within his drama, the playwright portrays a post-Eden world where God does not take an active interest in his protagonist’s life. In this way, Byron challenges the Calvinistic concept of Providence. In Byron’s play, Cain experiences God through His absence and silence while the other members of his family seem to experience God as more providential, thereby highlighting Cain’s status as the original non-elect human. By doing this, Byron underscores the injustice of Unconditional Election and exposes the Calvinistic doctrine as being tyrannical and even immoral.