Minjung Theology in Korea A Critique from a Reformed Theological Perspective

Eunsoo Kim

EVER SINCE THE FIRST Korean church was built should be noted as well that I will carry out in 1887,1 by God's grace and providence this discussion from a Reformed missiolog­ Christianity has grown quite rapidly. How­ ical perspective in order to construct what I ever, the rapid growth ofthe Korean church believe are proper biblical responses to has been marked by many political, social, those issues. To reach this goal I will first economic and religious conflicts during the examine the definition and main contents last century. As a result, on the one hand the of minjung theology. Second there will be Korean church has grown as a strong, praying, a discussion of the theological backgrounds faithful and conservative church through of minjung theology. Third I will mention the experience of severe ordeals.2 On the three bases of minjung theology, because its other hand, it has experienced many prob­ concept of social issues is deeply related to lems3 because of the rapid growth in the these bases. Fourth minjung theology's process of liberation from Japan and mod­ concept of God will be discussed. Fifth I ernization after the Korean War (1950-1953), will offer a critique of the main issue of lacking enough time to grow in maturity. minjung theology, han. Sixth will be a In the 1970s the Korean economy devel­ comparison to Marxism and Liberation oped very quickly under the leadership of Theology in Latin America. Seventh I will President Jung Hee Park. However, during evaluate minjung theology in terms of its this period the Korean people were also hermeneutics and contextualization from a engaged in a great political struggle against Reformed missiological perspective. President Park's military dictatorship. It was at this time that "Minjung Theology" WHAT IS MINJUNG THEOLOGY was formulated by so-called liberal Korean theologians, who Were deeply concerned The meaning of Iminjung' about the relationship between contempo­ rary Christianity and Korea's pressing It is very important to understand the term socio-political problems (Daniel Park 1985; minjungt in minjung theology. Kwang-Hee Lee 1993, 63). Therefore, even though it is Lee explains its literal meaning as follows: not exactly the same, minjung theology is a "The word 'minjung' is a Korean combina­ Korean version of Liberation Theology in tion of two Chinese characters, 'min' and Latin America. 'jung.' Min literally means 'the people,' and In this study the writer's goal is to analyze 'jung' means 'the mass.' Combining these the central issues in minjung theology as two words, 'minjung' means 'the mass of they arose in their Korean context. It people' or simply 'the people'." However,

53 JAPAN CHRISTIAN REVIEW 64 1998

in minjung theology, it has a strong conno­ jung, there are also the rich and highbrows. tation of common people as distinct from Because it is just a group of many people rulers. Drawing on this connotation, the together, as a socia-political concept the minjung theologians define minjung as the daijung is unable to have political subjec­ poor, oppressed and deprived people as tivity. But minjung, Suh asserts, is original­ opposed to the rich and powerful (Se-Yon ly a politio-theological concept. The group Kim 1987, 252). In other words, minjung is that is ruled by others is the minjung (Suh the social, political and economic suffering 1983,225-229). people throughout Korea's long history Concerning these clarifications, Suh con- (Lee 1993, 108). cludes in the following way: Nam-Dong Suh, one of the core founders If I define it in a word, minjung is the of minjung theology, explains the differ­ common people and masses. However, ences between the term minjung and other it has a broader meaning than the prole­ similar terms to clarify its meaning within tariat. If we see it from the socia-eco­ minjung theology.5 First, he distinguishes nomic historical perspective, it means minjung from baiksung (Suh 1983,225). As the truly oppressed and deprived class. a matter of fact, in Korean terminology min­ But if we say it from a political and the­ jung and baiksung are almost the same con­ ological perspective, minjung is not al­ cept and are interchangeable. But Suh dis­ ways the oppressed and deprived class, tinguishes the two because baiksung, he but minjung is and should be the subject says, is a word that connotes the ruling class, of history (Suh 1983,183). for example kings or rulers. Therefore he rejects that term as feudalistic and advo­ cates minjung because it carries the idea The crucial point of minjung theology that minjung is master, that the minjung are According to minjung theologians it is the the subject of history, their own life and minjung who produce the real values in their own society. Second, he also distin­ life, and they are therefore the real "subject guishes minjung from shimin, which means of history" (Suh 1983, 183; Se-Yoon Kim "citizen." He says that shimin is another 1987, 252). Nevertheless, they are exploit­ word that presumes the society and system ed and oppressed by the minority ruling of the feudalism in the Middle Ages. Minjung class and reduced to the status of the weak, has broader classes up from the bottom of the despised and the condemned. Minjung society than shimin, and the minjung theologians maintain that the minjung are should be the subject of history. Suh also naive, innocent and long-suffering (Se­ distinguishes the word minjung from the Yoon Kim 1987, 252). Also, minjung the­ proletariat. He says that proletariat high­ ologians insist that the point of departure lights economic problems as the driving for a proper Christian theology must be the force behind revolutions in history, but the presupposition that God is the God of the concept of minjung does not focus so much minjung and that his salvation history is a on economic problems as it is does on cul­ history of his liberation or salvation of the tural and social existence, and it thus is a minjung from the hands of their oppres­ broader concept than proletariat. Also, Suh sors. They hold that it is the task of Korean distinguishes minjung from daijung, which theology to interpret the missio Dei, the means "the masses." He says that daijung is saving and liberating acts of God, in the simply the mass of many people together. present situation of the minjung in Korea. Daijung does not particularly mean disre­ The methodology they prescribe for this garded and disabled people. Within dai- task is socia-economic analysis (Se-Yoon

54 KIM: Minjung Theology

Kim 1987, 253). Therefore, David Kwang­ God and a work of man. Socio-politicallib­ Sun Suh defines minjung theology as fol­ eration is a human achievement and a man­ lows: "It is a theology of the oppressed in ifestation of the kingdom. Their concern for the Korean political situation, a theological context, goals and hermeneutics influenced response to the oppressors, to the Korean greatly the formulation of minjung theology. church and its mission" (David K. Suh The Third Conference of the WCC (1961), 1981,18). held in New Delhi, dealt with the theme "Salvation Today."f; This conference moti­ Theological backgrounds of minjung theology vated liberal Korean churches to partici­ pate in the social and political struggles of The founding minjung theologians, such as Korea (Lee 1993,79). Nam-Dong Suh and Byungmoo Ahn, were influenced greatly by certain well-known THREE BASES FOR MINJUNG THEOLOGY theologians and by worldwide, so-called "liberal" Christian gatherings. Minjung theologians take the minjung's First of all they were influenced by Jiirgen socio-econo-political events in the Bible, Moltmann, the Protestant theologian of church history and Korean history as their Tiibingen. He understood Trinitarianism in theological references (Se-Yoon Kim 1987, terms of a "History of God" that is connect­ 253-257). ed with Christ and man rather than as the unreal ritual symbol that has no connection The biblical basis with experience or practice. Through Molt­ mann minjung theologians were influenced by the concept of the futuristic, historical A. THE EXODUS EVENT God, the eschatological unification of God Minjung theology refers seriously to the and God as the liberator. They were also Bible as being fundamentally an account of influenced by Paul LOffler of the Mission­ oppressed people's experience and history. sakademie, Hamburg, Germany. He inter­ In minjung theology the Bible becomes preted the cross of Christ and the coming of non-religious; it becomes socia-economic the reign of God in political terms (Myung­ history. The Scriptures are not the revela­ Hyuk Kim 1990, 125-129). Minjung theolo­ tion given by God. Minjung theology takes gians also accepted the theology of history history and culture as the best references; proposed by Pannenberg. According to the Bible is only a record of an oppressed him, God's revelation cannot be limited to people's experience. On this presupposition, the Bible, but must include secular history as minjung theology emphasizes the exodus its locus (Lee 1993, 75). Bonhoeffer also event and Christ's crucifixion and resurrec­ influenced the minjung theologians con­ tion as biblical bases. Besides these events, cerning "serving our neighbors." By his the Code of Covenant (Exodus 20:22-23:19), influence, Nam-Dong Sun maintained that Micah and Amos in the Old Testament, and the Christian faith is "serving our neigh­ Luke 4:18-21 and Mark's Gospel in the bors, and that Jesus is there where we serve New Testament are important biblical ref­ others" (Suh 1976, 227). erences for minjung theology (Lee 1993, 96, Besides the above theologians, Libera­ 97,109). tion Theology in Latin America and Ecu­ Suh contends that the exodus of the menical Theology (WCC) greatly influenced Hebrew people from their slavery in Egypt minjung theologians. According to Libera­ constitutes the first aspect of the biblical tion theologians, the kingdom is a gift of basis of minjung theology (Se-Yoon Kim

55 JAPAN CHRISTIAN REVIEW 64 1998

1987,253). He criticizes traditional theology 4. Jesus sides with the ochlos and for interpreting the exodus spiritually and accepts them as they are without making removing its historical, socio-economic any conditions. significance. Thus Suh argues that the exo­ 5. Jesus does not give the impression dus as a socio-economic event has the status that he intends to organize the ochlos of an archetype or paradigm for God's inter­ into a force. vention in history and that such interven­ 6. In a word, Jesus informed the minjung tion takes place in the socio-economic of "the advent of God's kingdom." arena today as well (Suh 1983, 51). Like­ 7. Jesus proclaimed the coming of God's wise, minjung theologians claim that in the kingdom. He stands with the minjung Old Testament Yahweh is the God of min­ and promises them the future of God jung, the minjung are the people of God (Ahn 1981,149-50; Lee 1993, 82). and God's saving work is directed toward According to Ahn, Jesus' decision to go to liberating the minjung (Se-Yoon Kim 1987, Galilee after the arrest of John the Baptist 254). (Mark 1:14-15) indicates that he entered into the situation of the minjung as one of B. THE INTERPRETATION OF OXAO'> ("0CHLOS") them. Galilee was the land of the oppressed, alienated and exploited minjung (ochlos), Byung-Moo Ahn and a couple of Japanese and for the minjung his proclamation of the New Testament scholars provide an addi­ imminence of the kingdom of God consti­ tional biblical base through their interpre­ tuted a message of hope (S.e-Yoon Kim ox'Ao,>7 tation of the Greek word in the 1987,254). Gospel of Mark. These scholars hold that Mark uses oXAm not merely to refer to a C. JESUS' CRUCifiXION AND RESURRECTION crowd but as a significant theological con­ cept. They say it refers to the poor, the Jesus' crucification and resurrection are oppressed, the despised, the sick and so on, another significant biblical basis of min­ including tax collectors, harlots and sin­ jung theology. Minjung theologians under­ ners According to Ahn, Jesus did not love all stand Jesus' crucifixion as a political event, equally but rather showed a partisan love resulting from political motivation. Sun for the ochlos (minjung), accepting them insists that the sentencing of Jesus to the unconditionally and protecting them with­ cross was due to his political uprising out evaluating them in any way8 (Se-Yoon against the Jerusalem rulers who were Kim 1987, 254). Let us see Byungmoo Ahn's exploiting minjung, which eliminates the descriptions of the characteristics of the redemptive meaning of the cross (Myung­ ochlos and the attitude ofJesus toward them Hyuk Kim 1990, 144). Behind this idea is in the Gospel of Mark as seen through the tendency of minjung theology to identify Sang-Bok Lee's translation: Jesus Christ as a collective symbol. Byung­ 1. Mark deliberately avoided the term Moo Ahn says that clearly: laos and used the term ochlos to indi­ It was not Jesus of Nazareth but rather cate the minjung.9 minjung who was unjustly tried and 2. The term ochlos is not consolidated as crucified .... Jesus as the Son of Man is a concept but defined in a relational way just a collective symbol. The death of and is therefore a fluid notion. minjung on the cross represents the 3. The ochlos are feared by the unjust breaking of a vicious circle of avenging and powerful but they are not organized violence by means of violence. That Jesus into a power group. was raised means that the minjung of

56 KIM: Minjung Theology

Galilee werexaised (Se-Yoon Kim 1987, decidedly a religion of rulers and began to 255). lose its apocalyptic and revolutionary Minjung theologians also interpret Jesus' character. Thus, Christianity came to resurrection and the resurrection of the project the kingdom of God as a temporal saints in the same way. Suh calls the death kingdom, beyond history, and the Chris­ of Jesus "a political murder" and the resur­ tian faith came to function as an opiate for rection "a protest and resolution of han." the minjung (Suh 1983, 258). Also the resurrection of the believers as In these criticisms Suh indicates that the those who were killed innocently or mis­ church preserved the apocalyptic and revo­ treated is the resolution of han. Therefore, lutionary character of the Jesus movement in he says, those who have died after a natural the concept of the millennial kingdom, and life span are excluded from the resurrec­ he insists that this concept be revived today tion. For the "resurrection will only be of so that it may coexist with the concept of those who were killed." Thus, minjung the­ the kingdom of God1o (Suh 1983, 249). ology accepts the resurrection as "a socio­ Based upon this totally different interpreta­ political concept," the "effort toward a new tion, Suh insists that the goal of minjung society" and "a Messianic politics" (Myung­ theology is as follows: Hyuk Kim 1990, 144-45). It is the goal of minjung theology to reunify the purification of individual CHURCH HISTORY souls on the one hand and the human­ Minjung theologians see church history in a ization of the social structure on the totally different way from the perspective other-elements of genuine Christianity of conservative Protestant theologians. This that have been separated by the church's new interpretation of church history is the depoliticization of the original gospel other basis ofminjung theology. Nam-Dong (Suh 1983, 256). Suh develops his new perspective of church history, taken from within the minjung's THE TRADITION OF THE MINJUNG MOVE­ political movements, through critiques of MENT IN KOREAN HISTORY the early churches. First he argues as fol­ lows: Minjung theologians are also trying to find a basis for their theology in various minjung The political movement of Jesus was movements in Korean history (Suh 1983, depoliticized when the Hellenistic church 66-68; Se-Yoon Kim 1987,257). Explaining transformed its original historical frame­ the history of Korean minjung movements, work based on Hebrew thought into a Nam-Dong Suh points out 14 historical metaphYSical framework based on Hel­ events as the genealogy of minjung move­ lenistic thought, transformed the political ments. Through this genealogy of minjung messiah of the rninjung into the Christ of movements he shows that there have been heaven, and transformed the political many movements of liberation of the poor cross into a religious symbol (Suh 1983, and oppressed (the minjung) in Korea, from 248). the earliest periods of Korean history to the Second, he criticizes Constantine as the present. Among these, Suh and minjung person who made Christianity a rulers' reli­ theologians have pointed out especially gion: three historical minjung movements in When Constantine adopted Christianity as Korea as the best examples of minjung's the state religion, Christianity became struggle for self-liberation (Lee 1993, 65).

57 JAPAN CHRISTIAN REVIEW 64 1998

First, minjung theologians like to point the urgent objective of theology today is to to the Tonghak Revolution in 1894 as their interpret theology in the light of socio-eco­ foundation. In the Tonghak Revolution, the nomic history. oppressed minjung defined themselves as If we think of this point from the per­ the subject of their own history and destiny spective of Reformed hermeneutics, min­ (Lee 1993, 79). Second, minjung theolo­ jung theology denies the absolute God who gians are trying to find their spirit in the is transcendent. It identifies the triune God March First Independence Movement, in with human beings or human culture. It is 1919, against Japan. Thirdly, minjung the­ trying to accept the triune God only in ologians regard the April Nineteenth Revo­ homocentric culture. lution of Students against the government of President Lee as another root. Minjung HAN, THE GREATEST ISSUE OF MINJUNG theologians interpret these events as the THEOLOGY minjung's struggle for a liberation stimulat­ According to Minjung theologians, han is ed by Christianity. Suh characterizes all one of the most significant concepts. As such movements as "messianic" and insists Witvliet points out, han is a very important that they must be understood in terms of issue in minjung theology (Witvliet 1985, God's struggle for his justice and freedom11 164) and is really hard to explain in a single (Se-Yoon Kim 1987, 257). word. Sang-Bok Lee explains the term as follows: "Han is a Korean word which may THE CONCEPT OF GOD IN MINJUNG THE­ be defined as 'deep agony and sorrow,' OLOGY 'accumulated bitterness,' and 'resentment.' There is no God-concept in minjung theol­ It can also be translated as a collective feel­ ogy, because the major interest of minjung ing of unresolved resentment against theology is not the traditional Christian God unjustifiable suffering" (Lee 1993, 93). but the historical man, minjung. Myung­ Nam-dong Suh defines han as follows: Hyuk Kim explained that point very clearly. Therefore 'han' is an underlying feeling "They insist that it is time to think of God as of the oppressed Korean people. On the a historical God who acts in history and one hand, it is a dominant feeling of man, instead of the doctrinal, metamorphic defeat, resignation, and nothingness. On ontological God of traditional Christianity" the other hand, it is a feeling with a (Myung-Hyuk Kim 1990, 136). tenacity of will for life which comes to Thus, man in Minjung theology is not a weaker beings. The first aspect can mere rational being but a concrete actual sometimes be sublimated to great artistic being who is exploited and suppressed, not expressions and the second aspect could an individual, but a communal minjung. erupt as the energy for revolution or Since the object of minjung theology is the rebellion"12 (Suh 1983, 87). historical minjung, minjung's God is the Minjung theology deals with this minjung's God who lives along with minjung, is "han" rather than minjung's "sin" as a core immanent within minjung, and is equal to theme (Myung-Hyuk Kim 1990,146). Min­ minjung. Nam-Dong Suh says that "Jesus jung theologians do not understand a sinner had not claimed himself as a hero, but as a person who has sinned against God came down into minjung to identify with and his neighbor. Nam-Dong Suh writes, minjung; therefore, Christ is minjung and "Sin is only a label that the ruling puts to minjung is the messiah" (Suh 1983, 168). the weak and the opponents, and so-called Therefore, minjung theologians opine that sinners are actually victims of the crime

58 KIM: Minjung Theology and suffer" (Suh 1983, 244). Therefore, Suh Marxist socia-economic theory is power­ insists significantly as follows: ful in its analysis of the structure of the The core issue ofminjung theology is the Latin American society and for constructing issue of 'han' rather than 'sin.' The role of liberation theology. But the case in Korea is the church is that of how she may different. According to A. Sang Park, min­ remove the minjung's han .... It is very jung theologians found that marxism is not dangerous to mention sin without this the best instrument to analyze Korean sociological analysis. The issue we are social problems because the Korean min­ facing now is the issue of 'han,' not the jung experience of socia-economic and political oppression occurred before the problem of 'sin.' Not the problem of introduction of capitalism into Korea (Park 'sin,' but the social condition that leads us 1984,9). The stories ofminjung contain the to commit sin. Not the problem of sin, history of the suffering minjung, their but the problem of tyranny (Suh 1983, courageous resistance against their rulers 243,244). and the vision of a new society. Chi-Ha Kim, the Korean Catholic lay-the­ After examining the difference between ologian, refers to dan as the only possibility the minjung and the marxist proletariat, to break out of the situation of han. Dan is to William Ferm finally says, "The proletariat overcome han. Personally, it is self-denial. is defined socia-economically, while the Collectively, it is to cut a vicious circle of minjung is known politically" (Ferm 1987, revenge (Kuster 1994, 114). 374). Sang-Bok Lee also explored this issue Minjung theology, thus, in place of sal­ and writes, "The Korean minjung (people) do vation through a restored relationship not tolerate marxism because they experi­ between God and man by repentance of sin enced the Marxists' terror during the Kore­ and forgiveness, understands salvation as a an Civil War from 1950-1953, started by humanization process through the resolu­ North Korean Communists" (Lee 1993, 88). tion ofthe han's predicament by such means Minjung theology is branded as a pro­ as liberation, expression and clarifications. marxist theology by many of the conservative Therefore, as Myung-Hyuk Kim points out, Korean churches, as it identifies itself with in Minjung theology no repentance is nec­ a humanistic revolutionary theology. Though essary. A sinner is not to be ashamed, but the conservative churches in Korea have bold. Minjung theology speaks of "working the tendency to say that minjung theology is out one's own salvation" in which minjung a pro-marxist theology, the concept of min­ is the subject, instead of a dependent salva­ jung is not the same as the marxist prole­ tion that relies on the blood of Christ tariat. (Myung-Hyuk Kim 1990,147). However I would argue that even though minjung theology is not the same as Marx­ MARXISM AND MINJUNG THEOLOGY ism, as a matter of fact the methodology of minjung theology is similar to Marxism. It is necessary to distinguish minjung the­ This is true, for example, with regard to its ology from Marxism. Actually, minjung understanding of and attitude towards vio­ theologians reject Marxism.13 In examining lence.14 Commonly, minjung theologians minjung theology, Donald Clark notes, "One try to justify violence on the basis of "the key point is that it is non-marxist and does desperate situation" in the social and polit­ not use marxist language. This, of course, is ical dimensions. At the same time, they jus­ a requirement in South Korea" (Clark 1986, tify minjung's (the oppressed people's) vio­ 45). lence toward the rulers for their liberation on

59 JAPAN CHRISTIAN REVIEW 64 7998

the basis of legitimate self-defense, which Minjung theology, therefore, is some­ the violated one uses against the violator what similar to Black Theology in the United (Suh 1983, 200-201). States. Their problems are really multi­ However Scripture does not support vio­ dimensional. Black people can be called lence for justice in minjung theology and the oppressed (minjung) in the United States Marxism. In the Old Testament God uses from the perspective of minjung theology. violence as a means for divine judgment Their problem is somehow similar to the against sin. One cannot find that kind of Korean minjung's problem. The minjung violence in the life of Christ on the earth. are made up of political outcasts, laborers, He did not allow the way of violence women, the poor, the illiterate, the illegiti­ against structural injustice. One violence of mate, et cetera (Park 1984, 8). man will bring another violence. EVALUATION AND CRITICISM MINJUNG THEOLOGY AND LIBERATION THEOLOGY On the hermeneutics of Minjung Theology As Theo Sundermeier points out, minjung theology can be categorized as liberation Reformed theologians believe that the Bible theology, though not as systematically devel­ is without error, the only source of theology, oped as Latin American Liberation Theology15 and the starting point of all areas of study (Sundermeier 1987, 48). However, those (Berkhof 1974,40-66). On the basis of this theologies are not the same. A. Sang Park absolute presupposition, Reformed herme­ made the distinction very clearly. He says: neutics requires four principles of interpre­ tation: grammatical-syntactical, historical­ Poverty is the single biggest problem in cultural, theological (Berkhof1974, 66-165), Latin America. Because of the huge gap and contextual (Lee 1993,103). between the rich (minority) and the poor On the contrary, minjung theologians (majority), Latin American Liberation suggest a sociological hermeneutic on the Theology is mainly concerned with the basis of their belief that social conditions liberation of the poor. [On the other determine humanity and interpretation (Lee hand,] in Korea, social problems arise 1993, 110). Minjung theology, therefore, from cultural, social, political repression employs a socio-political hermeneutic of as well as economic oppression (Park the Christian gospel from the viewpoint of 1984,7). the past and the present experience of min­ On the basis of this analysis, he argues that jung suffering. This theology asserts that the term "minjung" designates not only the the biblical message cannot be fully under­ economically oppressed, but also the cul­ stood until we understand the history of turally, politically and socially oppressed. the Korean minjung because, minjung the­ Of course, we cannot exclude the fact that the ologians say, the Bible is rooted in the history poor in Latin America have been exploited of the biblical minjung. Therefore, minjung politically, socially and culturally as well theologians argue that the gospel and the as economically. However, as Park men­ history of the Korean minjung are to be tions, in the Latin America context the interpreted through the hermeneutical main source of their oppression comes process of minjung theology (Park 1984, within the economic dimension. In that 10). sense, the concept of minjung is broader Identical to the explanations ofNam-dong than that of the Latin American poor. Suh and Byung-Moo Ahn, A. Sang Park

60 KIM: Minjung Theology clearly insists on the basic hermeneutical the kingdom into verbal form meaningful task of minjung theology in the following to the peoples in their separate cultures way: and within their particular existential situ­ The basic hermeneutical task of minjung ation" (Nicholls 1975, 647). Therefore, the theology is not to interpret the Bible most significant issue in the process of con­ (text) in the light of the Korean situation textualization is how we transform the (the context), but to interpret the suffering gospel to a context without changing the experience of the Korean minjung (the meanings of the biblical truth. Sang-Bok context) in the light of the Bible (text). Lee defines it thusly: "Contextualization, Minjung theology contends that the therefore, refers to the process by which minjung do not exist for the authority of indigenous cultural forms and ideas are uti­ lized to communicate biblical truth within a the Bible, but the authority of the Bible given contextual milieu without changing exists for the freedom of the minjung. This does not mean that the minjung are the meanings of the biblical truth" (Lee 1993, 118). more important than the Bible; it means Minjung theology contends to be a con­ that the minjung are a starting point for a biblical hermeneutics (Park 1984, 10). textualized theology focused upon the actual struggles of the life of the Korean Thus minjung theologians reject the Bible minjung. In this process minjung theology as the fundamental and absolute source for emphasizes secularization and the work of hermeneutics and reject virtually all the "Holy Spirit. "16 In their attempt at contex­ doctrines of the Old and New Testaments tualization, minjung theologians believe and the historic church. Instead, they that the minjung-oriented church is the real appeal to only a few elements of the Bible, church of Christ; therefore, for them, to interpreting them arbitrarily, and to some serve the suffering minjung politically and marginal examples within church history economically is to serve Jesus himself (Lee that orthodox Christians have judged to be 1993,123-124). aberrations from the true path of faith. Fur­ Minjung theology is a good example of thermore their theology contains many sub­ Christian theology degenerating into syn­ Christian and anti-Christian elements. There­ cretism in the process of contextualization fore according to the Bible as the only and when biblical particularism is not ade­ absolute basis of theology and hermeneutics, quately protected. Se-Yoon Kim insists, "it we should say that minjung theology and should serve as a strong warning to enthu­ its hermeneutics are wrong. This is because, siasts of a radical contextualization of the as Se-Yoon Kim pointed out, "No theology gospel or of Christian theology" (Se-Yoon that rejects virtually all the doctrines of the Kim 1987, 273). New Testament and the historic church can lay any claim to being a Christian theology" CONCLUSION (Se-Yoon Kim 1987, 273). Today minjung theology is a well-known On the contextualization of Minjung Theology contemporary theology of missions that began in Korea in the 1970s. Within the last Contextualization is a theological necessity 40 years, in different contexts in the world, demanded by the incarnational nature of several contemporary theologies have been the Word (Lee 1993, 115). Bruce Nicolls formulated by liberal theologians in terms defines contextualization as "the translation of "missions"; for example, Liberation The­ of the unchanging content of the gospel of ology in Latin America, Political Theology in

61 JAPAN CHRISTIAN REVIEW 64 1998

Germany, Black Theology in United States, First, minjung theology tries to combine Feminist Theology, and Minjung Theology in biblical and Korean history. It is a theology Korea. These theologies have the same target that starts from man's situations and ends of missions, which is to liberate people for man's glory. In other words, it cares from various forms of social, economic and only about homocentric culture and not political oppression. about the absolute and transcendent God Minjung theology is a contemporary the­ and His truth. As a human-centered con­ ology that came out of the struggle of the temporary theology, minjung theology liberal theologians for social and political focuses on "now-not the future or eter­ justice in Korea. It takes the minjung's nal," "man-not God" and "better condi­ socio-economical events in the Bible, church tions in freedom-not man's essential con­ history and Korean history as its theological dition." Minjung theologians advocate this references, then carries out its contextual­ theology as follows: "Minjung theology is ization through syncretism, humanization not primarily concerned about Korean and secularization, then identifies all social Christians in particular, but the oppressed actions and radical reformation with evan­ Korean minjung in general," and "Minjung gelism as its mission. Therefore, in a word, theology is a theology for the oppressed minjung theology is heretical in the light of minjung, of the oppressed minjung, and by the Scriptures,17 the oppressed minjung (Park 1984,10-11). However when viewed from a more pos­ According to minjung theologians, the min­ itive perspective, minjung theology can be jung are not the object but the subject of the Bible, of history and of the Church. There­ considered as a challenge within Korean fore, Myung-Hyuk Kim has said that "Min­ Christianity. Traditionally, the Korean Pro­ jung theology has gone out of the theological testant church has been characterized as boundary. For its major interest is not God or very conservative and enthusiastic about Jesus of the Bible but the liberation and growth, but lacking social concern. I would humanization of minjung" (Myung-Hyuk argue that this character of the Korean Kim 1990, 149). church provided two extreme movements Second, I define this theology as a "tem­ in Korean church history, especially during porary theology" or "fashion theology." This the 1970s: one is the Pentecostal movement is because in minjung theology, one cannot represented by Rev. Yong-Gi Cho, and the have the eternal and unchangeable goal. other is minjung theology and the social We Reformed theologians have an eternal gospel movement. Therefore, in a sense, and unchangeable goal: to glorify God forever minjung theology has become an inevitable in any situation. This goal has not been reproof for the weakness of the Korean changed at any time or any place through Protestant church to give adequate attention all history. Of course, minjung theologians to the needs of the poor and oppressed. will answer that they also have an eternal Within this situation, minjung theology has and unchangeable goal: to liberate minjung become a great challenge for the Korean forever. However, many of the issues that church to give its attention to the total they faced in Korea in the 1970s are mean­ growth and maturity that deeply considers ingless today. According to changing social social dimensions as well as spiritual and political conditions, their issues and dimensions. even the theology itself has changed or Combined with such a positive evalua­ been lost. As a matter of fact, in Korea tion, I would like to point out two funda­ today minjung theology has become more mental problems in minjung theology. of a minority group as compared to the

62 K,M: Minjung Theology

1970s and the 1980s, and people as a whole 3 Kyung-Bae Min separated those problems into are not concerned any more about this the­ several categories. For example, the loss of the orig­ ology. It is a temporary or fashion theology. inal simple faith, the loss of the tradition and faith­ Finally, thinking of how to deal with fulness of Korean church and the divisions of Kore­ an church (Min 1987, 8,9). minjung theology from the Reformed missi­ ological perspective, I wish to argue a point 4 Historically speaking, the term minjung came for the Korean church. That is, the Korean to be used during the Lee dynasty (1392-1910). In those days, the plebeians were oppressed by the church should establish a total biblical the­ Yangban class and anyone who was excluded from ology of missions. The Korean church has the Yangban class was a minjung (Park 1984, 2). had a strong tendency to stand on the faith Broadly speaking, there were three classes in those of "Scripture alone," as the Reformers days. Yangban was the high and ruling class. The advocated. This has been a strong basis of second class was called Pyungmin, which included the plebeians. The third class was the Sangnom. Korean church growth. However, it is also This class was the lowest class and generally significant to stand on "the total Scripture" served the Yangban. that the same Reformers advocated. Because 5 He explains these differences in "the concept of failing to see all aspects of living under all of minjung" (Suh 1983, 224-231). According to of Scripture, the Korean church has devel­ Byungmoo Ahn, one of the foremost minjung the­ oped many theological, practical, and mis­ ologians, "minjung is indefinable" because "it is a siological problems. holistic, dynamic, and changing reality, one which Related to this point, Sang-Bok Lee rec­ escapes categorization" (Ahn 1991, 27). ommends the following points: (1) the 6 Philip Potter explained this theme "as being (Korean) churches should plan for maturity personal and social liberation from everything instead of only numerical growth, (2) they which prevented man from attaining authentic existence in justice and community" (Bosch 1976, should have a holistic mission: evangelism 65). and social concern, (3) the churches should 7 He distinguishes och10s (minjung) from laos conduct sound contextual hermeneutics, (people or citizen) and mazetai (disciples). See (4) God-centered critical contextualization Ahn's "Ochlos and Mazetai" in Stories of Minjung is significant to avoid syncretism, (5) the Theology (1991): 273ff. churches should develop a comprehensive 8 Ahn maintains that Mark's presentation of the biblical understanding of the kingdom of life and fate of Jesus is not a biography of an indi­ God, especially in its missiological dimen­ vidual but a "social biography" of the ochlos (min­ sions (Lee 1993, 156). I agree with these jung). The term "Jesus," "Son of God," "Messiah," five suggestions and they thus make a "Son of Man," and the like are not references to the fitting conclusion to this study. individual Jesus but collective terms for the ochlos­ minjung (Ahn, "Jesus and Ochlos," in Minjung and Korean Theology in Korea, 90-91, 97.) NOTES 9 Laos is accepted as the meaning of "God's 1 On September 27, 1887, 14 Korean converts people" and ochlos as "the outcast" (Park 1984, 5). gathered together for worship at the Missionary 10 According to Suh, the concept of the king­ Horace G. Underwood's home in Chungdong, dom of God in church history represents the doctrine Seoul. It was the first organized church in Korea of salvation through a savior, whereas the concept of (Yang-Sun Kim 1971, 68). the millennial kingdom represents the doctrine of salvation through the minjung's own struggles (Se­ 2 Sungkuh Chung examined the growth of the Yoon Kim 1987, 256). Korean church from the perspective of God's prov­ idence and the Calvinistic preaching of Korean liOn this presupposition, Yong-Bok Kim, one of pastors through the suffering ages in Korean histo­ the minjung theologians, does not hesitate to call ry (Chung 1996,17,21). Jae-Woo Choi, the founder of the Tonghak religious

63 JAPAN CHRISTIAN REVIEW 64 1998

movement, "Messiah Choi" or "Jesus Choi" (Se­ REFERENCES Yoon Kim 1987, 257; Myung-Hyuk Kim 1990, 258). Ahn, Byungmoo. Minjung Shinhak Iyagi (Sto­ 12 Nam-Dong Suh has pointed out four main ries of Minjung Theology). Kangnamku, ways that the han have suffered during Korean his­ Seoul: Hankuk Shinhak Yunkuso (1991). tory and calls them the Fourfold Han of the Korean people: (1) Koreans have suffered numerous inva­ Berkhof, Louis. Principles of Biblical Inter­ sions by surrounding powerful nations so that the pretation. Grand Rapids: Baker Book very existence of the Korean nation has come to be House (1974). understood as han. (2) Koreans have continually Bosch, David J. "Crosscurrents in Modern suffered under the tyranny of rulers so that they Mission," Missionalia 4 (November, 1976): think of their existence as oppressed people. (3) 54-84. Also, under Confucianism's strict imposition of laws and customs discriminating against women, Chung, Sungkuh. Korean Church and the existence of women was han itself. (4) At a cer­ Reformed Faith. Seattle, WA: Time Print­ tain point in Korean history, about half of the pop­ ing (1996). ulation was registered as hereditary slaves and Clark, Donald N. Christianity in Modern were treated as property rather than as people of Korea. New York: University Press of the nation (Suh 1981, 54). America Inc. (1986). 13 Actually, Nam-Dong Suh makes a distinc­ Ferm, Deane William. ed. Third World Liber­ tion between the concept of "minjung" and "prole­ ation Theologies: A Reader. Maryknoll: tarian" (Suh 1983, 226-28) and he strongly insists on Orbis Books (1986). "human dignity" over against the socialist attitude Gutierrez, Gustavo. A Theology of Liberation. of "only social revolution" (Suh 1983,198). Also, Byung-Moo Ahn grew up in a miserable situation 8th Printing. Maryknoll, New York: Orbis under communism, so he strongly rejects Marxism Books (1995). (Ahn 1991,17-19). Kim, Myung-Hyuk. "The Concept of God in Minjung Theology," Evangelical Review of 14 Nam-Dong Suh argues this theme in his book, Minjung Shinhak U Tamgu (1983): 200-201, Theology 14 (April, 1990): 126-149. and Byun-Moo Ahn also deals with it in his book, Kim, Se-Yoon. "Is Minjung Theology a Chris­ Minjung Shinhak Iyagi (1991): 76-77. tian Theology?" Calvin Theological Journal 22 (November, 1987): 251-74. 15 Liberation theology was born in Latin Amer­ ica in the late 1960s in struggling with the faith and Kim, Yang-Sun. History of the Korean postcolonial deprivation. It pursuits to reinterpret the Church. Seoul: Christian Literature Com­ traditional faith of the church from the perspective pany (1971). of the poor and oppressed. Gutierrez defines liber­ Kim, Yong-Bok. "The minjung as the subject of ation as "Liberation from every form of exploita­ history," in Jong England, ed., Living theol­ tion, the possibility of a more human and dignified ogy in Asia. New York: Orbis Books (1982): life, the creation of a new mankind-all pass 25-31. through this struggle" (Gutierrez 1988, 174). Kuster, Volker."Minjung Theology and Min­ 16 For minjung theologians, the Spirit is a jung Art." Mission Studies 21 (1994): "dynamic force for the realization of minjung con­ 108-24. sciousness" (Yong-Bok Kim 1982, 134), and the "pan-universal, pan-historical movement" (Nam­ Lee, Sang-Bok. "A Comparative Study between Dong Suh 1982, 123). Their concept of the Spirit is Minjung Theology and Reformed Theology Shamanistic because, according to Shamanism, from a Missiological Perspective." D. Miss. everything is regarded as a manifestation of the dissertation, Reformed Theological Semi­ Spirit or spirits (Lee 1993. 125). nary (1993). 17 Se-Yo on Kim defines minjung theology as Min, Kyung-Bae. Hankuk Kidokkyo Kyohoisa "non-Christian" or "bizarre" theology, and he (History of the Korean Church). 6th ed. points out further problems in minjung theology Seoul, Korea: Daehan Kidokkyo Chulpansa (Se-Yoon Kim 1987, 272). (1987).

64 KIM: Minjung Theology

Nicholls, Bruce. "Theological Education and --. "Toward a theology of Ran," in Yong­ Evangelization," in J.D. Douglas, ed., Let Bock Kim, ed., Minjung theology. Singa­ the Earth Hear His Voice. Minneapolis: pore: The Christian Conference of Asia World Wide Publication (1975): 634-48. (1981). Park, Daniel Kwang-Sun. "An Evangelical --. "Blending of two stories," in Commit­ Evaluation of Minjung Theology in Korea." tee of Theological Study, ed., Minjung and Th.M. thesis, Fuller Theological Seminary Korean Theology. Seoul: Korean Theological (1985). Study Institute (1982). Park, Sung A. "Minjung Theology: A Korean --. Minjung Shinhak u Tamguh (A Contextual Theology" The Indian Journal Research of Minjung Theology). Seoul, of Theology, 33 (October-December, 1984): Korea: Rankilsa (1983). 1-11. Sundermeier, Theo. "Minjung Theology of Suh, David Kwang-Sun. "A biological sketch of Korea," Scriptura 22 (1987): 48-59. an Asian theological consultation," in Witvliet, Theo. 1985. A Place in the Sun: An Yong-Bock Kim, ed., Minjung theology. Introduction to Liberation Theology in the Singapore: The Christian Conference of Third World. Maryknoll: Orbis Books (1985). Asia (1981): 17-42. Suh, Nam-Dong. Theology at turning point. Seoul: Korean Theological Study Institute (1976).

65