英国新闻听力 对查尔斯王子爱尔兰演讲的感想（在线收听）

Prince Charles's speeches in Ireland this week have been profoundly moving. It seems to me that he did three things.

Firstly, he identified with the suffering of Ireland over centuries and, particularly, more recently. He said simply that the island of Ireland “has had more than its fair share of turbulence and troubles.” Secondly, he set his own personal suffering in the context of a complex mix of politics, economics, tribalism and nationalisms. And, thirdly, he recognised the reality of pain and grief – borne by so many – whilst opening up the possibility of what an American theologian calls “newness after loss”.

The murder of Lord Mountbatten in 1979 struck to the heart of the British establishment, but for those involved in the bereavement, it was always more than a political matter. As Prince Charles put it: “It seemed as if the foundations of all that we held dear in life had been torn apart irreparably.” He had already spoken of the “anguish of such deep loss.”

This is the conundrum, isn't it? The political and the global collide with the individual and the private. Which is how grief always works – often biting through the veneers of self-sufficiency we paint on to the scars of bereavement and helplessness, and awakening the pain of personal loss in the face of a community's need to move on.

I think what the events of this week suggest is that the only way to tackle grief and the rage of injustice is for us to face those who were a part of it. In the famous Yad Vashem memorial to the Warsaw Uprising during World War Two one of the bronze reliefs depicts the Nazi guards without faces – apparently because to have given them faces would have meant humanising them. But, I thought that was actually the point. It was human beings – with faces and stories and families and hopes and dreams and regrets – who caused unimaginable pain to people who could not defend themselves. It is what we are seeing in Syria and Iraq as IS target innocent people with extreme violence and inhumane brutality.

What Tuesday's meeting demonstrated – backing up words with handshakes – was that violence and death do not have to have the final word. Realistic forgiveness – however long it takes and however immense the personal or communal cost – opens the door for all parties to be set free for a future that looked closed. Which is why, in the Lord's Prayer, any expectation of forgiveness by God is inextricably linked to my forgiving those who have grieved me.

Reconciliation is not easy and is never cost-free. The German martyr Dietrich Bonhoeffer cried against notions of what he called “cheap grace”. But, it is in the cost of looking a person in the eye that freedom is secured – freedom to live again.

查尔斯王子本周在爱尔兰的演讲非常感人，在我看来他做了三件事。

首先，他认可了过去几个世纪以来，尤其是最近爱尔兰所经历的痛苦。他说，爱尔兰岛“经历的动荡和患难太多了”。第二，他将自己个人的痛苦置于政治、经济、部落主义和国家主义这样复杂混合的背景之下。第三，他承认很多人承受的痛苦和悲伤这一现实，同时开启了一位美国神学家所谓的“损失后新生”的可能。

1979年蒙巴顿勋爵被谋杀案震撼了这位英国王子的心，但对于丧亲者来说，这不仅是个政治事件。正如查尔斯王子所说：“似乎我们生命中所珍爱的一切的根基已经被无可修复地摧毁了”，他还提到“这种巨大损失的痛苦”。

这就是个难题，不是吗？政治和全球事件与个人和私人问题相撞，悲伤总是这样：它总是咬破我们涂在丧亲和无助伤疤上的虚饰，在社会需要继续前进时唤醒个人的伤痛。

我想，本周的事件表明，解决悲伤和不公正的唯一办法，就是直面那些参与其中的人。在著名的纪念二战期间华沙起义的亚德瓦谢姆大屠杀纪念里，其中一个青铜浮雕上刻着没有脸的纳粹警卫，显然这是因为，给他们加上脸就是意味着赋予他们人性。但我想这就是关键，是人——有着面孔、故事、家庭、希望、梦想和遗憾的人——他们会给那些无法自卫的人造成难以想象的痛苦，在IS组织用极端暴力和非人道的暴行对付无辜民众时，我们在叙利亚和伊拉克都看到这一点。

周二的会议除了言辞还有握手，这表明暴力和死亡未必就是最后结论。现实主义的原谅——无论需要多久才实现，无论个人或社会损失有多大——都会为各方开启未来的大门，在看似封闭的未来中找到自由。这也是为何在上帝的祈祷中，要想得到上帝原谅，都需要我原谅那些曾为我悲伤的人。

和解不易，而且从来不是没有代价的。德国烈士迪特里希·邦赫费尔大声反对所谓的“廉价恩典”。但正是需要直面一个人我们才能得到自由，能够再生的自由。