Minyjun Theology

Continuity and Transformation: Religious Synthesis in East Asia by Sang-Jin An (Asian Thought and Culture: Peter Lang) Using two nineteenth- and twentieth-century Korean religious developments (Donghak and Minjung Theology) against the Confucian-Shamanist cultural milieu, Sang Jin Ahn describes religious synthesis as the key to cultural transformation in East Asia. The synthesis involves the melding of the past (various religious traditions) in view of the present (sociohistorical context). From the particular vantage point of one who is thoroughly familiar with Eastern and Western cultures, Dr. Ahn draws a sketch of East Asian religious traditions and then engages in a dialogue with the contemporary global theological trend.

 Continuity and Transformation offers a glimpse at the spiritual landscape of East Asian peoples, in general, and Korean people, in particular. The focus of our attention is paid to the religious developments of Donghak, the name of the new teaching founded by Choe Je‑U (1824‑1864) in 1860 C.E., and Minjung theology, which was espoused by some Christian theologians during the tumultuous period of the 1970s in Korea. Though the two religious doctrines are about a century apart from each other, they are, nevertheless, closely related. I will use Choe's pseudonym "Suun" (which means "water‑cloud") instead of Je‑U, as the former has been the common usage in Korea. The following are some of the most notable themes discussed here: the synthesis of East Asian religious traditions in the Korean context vis‑a‑vis cultural transformation, gospel' and culture and Minjung theological perspectives. It will be stressed time and again that religious doctrines are contextual constructs and, hence, theological discussions must take place within proper historical context. I begin with the premise that Minjung theology, with its strong political aspirations, is a Korean cultural theology. The subject of culture, however, has by and large been neglected in Minjung theology. Perhaps the intensity of the political struggle in the past three decades accounts for this.

An suggesst that, due to that neglect, there are some Korean cultural contextual issues that have not been effectively addressed by Minjung theology. First, we are dealing with a culture that has been shaped by non­Christian ideals for well over two millennia. Theologizing (Christian) in Korea, then, is an attempt by Korean culture to accommodate this rather recent newcomer, Christianity, which in its equally long history was also shaped by very different cultural environments.

Second, we are dealing with a multi-religious situation, in which Christianity is the most recent newcomer among the major religions. Korea has been hailed by many as a remarkable success‑story in the history of Christian mission. This success, however, has also brought some problems to the nation. Since the Christian Church was born in Korea, it has not been friendly to the indigenous culture and other religious traditions already established there. Among the early missionaries in Korea, notes Pyun Sun Hwan, while "there were some like M. C. Fenwick, who realized and confessed the limits of the Korean mission as the transplantation of Western Christianity... most missionaries were propagandists of Western culture."

As Christianity became one of the most powerful forces in Korean society, en route to its growth and expansion there has come, in less than a century, the near eradication of some of the indigenous cultural traditions, many of which were not necessarily in conflict with the Christian faith. It is clear that the Christian mission brought with it not only a spiritual vision but also competing cultural claims.

The second problem has to do with the way the Church has treated other religions. There have been many instances in which Christians were involved in feuds with other religions, especially Buddhism. Sadly enough, the aggressors have been mainly from the Christian side. This antagonism toward the other is so widespread that Samu, a Korean-Canadian Buddhist priest, was compelled to write a letter to Pope John Paul II, then visiting Korea, addressing this unhealthy situation.'

The task remains for Christian theologians, then, to discern a right relationship between the gospel and culture in Korea. One important presupposition here is that neither the gospel nor culture is a static notion. The question often overlooked‑no doubt a difficult one for some‑is whether the gospel is a pure notion: is there any expression of the gospel in language that does not need first to go through the medium of interpretation to be understood? Can we single out even a phrase‑let alone a sentence‑in the traditional Christian doctrinal formulae and use it universally, hoping it will be fully understood by all cultures? Although this book is not an attempt to address or to find answers to these questions, it is fair to say that such questions must be presupposed in all theological discourse on the theme of culture and the gospel.

The purpose of this book is to illustrate the spiritual ethos Choe Jeu exemplas in founding Donghak, namely that a genuine cultural transformation is to be sought through a religious synthesis in a particular way. Among the various aspects of the Korean culture Minjung theology finds itself most akin to Donghak. The latter, then, is a nineteenth century precursor, or a spiritual ancestor, for the former. Conversely, Minjung theology is a twentieth century spiritual heir of Donghak.e Although this point has been mentioned by many, both Minjung theologians and others alike, it has not been clear how it is so. As well as drawing a sketch of a part of the East Asian religious landscape, this book will also attempt to illustrate some other points as follows: (1) In order to avoid missionary cultural imperialism, as shown in the "problems" described above, theology (or any religious talk) must begin with the local and move to the general or universal, and not vice versa; (2) Donghak provides an instructive Korean example of indigenous religious synthesis which begins with local "praxis," grounded broadly in the Korean religious world and especially in what An calls the "shaman ethos," and this approach is taken up later by Minjung theology; (3) The method implemented by Choe Je‑U and utilized by Minjung theology is corroborated by other liberation theologies, i.e., what is primarily normative in theology is what reflects the experience of the oppressed and contributes to their liberation.

Headline 3

insert content here

WT Main | About WT | Review Links | Contact | Review Sources | Search