토론 민중신학이 주장하는 사회 정의의 문제

[역사학도]

The Question of Love and Justice with Minjung Theology

Believing that there are the two mandates in Christian mission, Davie Bosch states that evangelism relates to social responsibility as seeds relates to fruit; evangelism remains primary (the church’s “main task”) but it generates social involvement and improved social conditions among those who have been evangelized (1992:404).[1]

In 1974, when the International Congress on World Evangelization met in The Lausanne, many evangelicals, particularly those from the Third World, went even a step farther toward social thinking.  But it should be questioned if the Lausanne spirit has not been misunderstood by the Minjung theologians in Korea.  It appears that there are rooms for misunderstanding depending on the historical and social situation of the country where it is implemented.  What will happen if it is the society where the influence of Marxism is strong? What will happen if those clergies who are in chare are those who themselves embrace the Marxist worldviews?   In fact, the Minjung theologians were those who reflected their Marxist worldview in their theology, and therefore those who were leftism-biased.  

It is universally agreed both within and outside Korea that the Korean government in 1970's did their best with good policy to improve the social and economic condition of the people.  Was perpetual protest for protest necessary in that context?  Were Minjung theologians better trained in the area of social science such as politics and economy than those specialists?   Was it really necessary that they should force the government to choose wrong policy?   After three decades of their political agenda in 1970's, few will agree the Minjung theologians' violent action was necessary for the society.  And those political interest groups with whom the Minjung theologians teamed up are now anti-Christian activists.  Here, a question arises if the methodology for social action by them was valid.   

It is right that Christians are expected to take social action.  But does it mean that Christians should always assume that every government is evil?  If Minjung theologians assumed so it is self-evident that they were wrong as now the political interest group now run the government.  The methodology for their political theology was simply wrong if they built it on the assumption that all government is evil.  If there is really a need that clergies should determine which government is good and evil, this task will require an objective basis and criteria.  But this objective criterion is impossible as far as these Minjung theologians depends solely on their subjectivism for methodology.  Minjung theology is more a reflection of their subjectivism rather than a Christian theology.  Therefore, objective criterion seems to be impossible with those Minjung theologians from the first. 

A group of church leaders and laity influenced by Minjung theology has been a part of political interest group.  But is this any good for justice if they claim the wrong way out of their political bias and ignorance?  As, Newbigin affirms the church is necessarily involved in politics, in that it is entrusted with a message concerning human well-being, concerning the true content of justice and freedom.  But he draws a clear line when he emphasizes:  “But the church betrays its calling when it seeks to become an organ of coercion.  Its role in politics is different and unique.  It is to embody and to announce the presence of the Kingdom under the sign of the cross and in the power of the resurrection” (2003:102).

http://cafe.daum.net/issue21

http://blog.daum.net/sionvoice

---

[1] Bosch quotes this idea from McGavran’s article, “Salvation Today” (1973).

[네오콘]

민중신학은 우리 기독인들 사이에서만 통용되는 말입니다. 절대로 일반인들은 이 말을 하지 않습니다. 그러므로 지금 국내에서도 민중신학을 말하는 이들은 모두 기독인들입니다. 그런나 그들의 영향력은 알게 모르게 상당함을 무시할 수 없습니다. 일부 몰지각한 자들은 그들을 참 목자로 인정하고 있다는 것이 가장 큰

[네오콘]

문제일 것입니다. 한국내 기독교계 내에서도 이들의 잘못된 생각을 질책하거나 바로잡으려는 시도가 없음이 매우 안타깝습니다. 저는 지금까지 민중신학자들에 대한 비판의 소리를 들어보지 못했습니다. 그러므로 작금에는 우파 진영에서 오히려 기독교를 폄훼하는 소리가 높습니다.

[네오콘]

이제 우리 기독인들은 우선 민중신학의 허상을 밝히는 일 ㅡ 다시 말하자면 이들은 성서에 기초한 목자가 아니라는 진실을 알리는 일이 더 시급하다고 생각합니다. 지금은 이들의 행태로 말미암아 무조건 기독인들은 폄훼하는 자들이 많아 졌다는 것입니다. 바로잡아야 겠지요.

[역사학도]

방금 끝단락을 추가하였는데, 그래서 이 끝단락이 중요한 것 같습니다.