혜암 이장식의 화해와 일치의 신학

강원돈(Won Don Kang) 혜암신학연구소 2020 신학과교회 Vol.13 No.-

이 글에서 필자는 혜암 이장식(惠岩 李章植)이 추구한 화해와 일치의 신학을 분석하고 그 의의를 평가하고자 한다. 이를 위해 필자는 혜암이 제시한 화해의 역사신학적 근거를 규명하고, 그다음에 화해와 일치에 관한 혜암의 주장을 분석하고, 끝으로 하나님의 선교를 둘러싼 갈등과 대립 속에서 혜암이 화해와 일치의 관점을 일관성 있게 지키며 제시한 의견을 살핀다. 첫째, 화해의 역사신학적 근거에 관련하여 필자는 혜암의 논증방식이 철저하게 기독론적이라는 것을 밝힌다. 그는 성육신 사건의 해석을 통하여 하나님이 개입하는 역사의 현실성을 강조하고, 하나님이 섭리로써 다스리는 역사의 궁극적 의미가 화해에 있다는 것을 규명하고, 하나님이 펼치는 역사에서 하나님과 인간의 협력을 부각시켰다. 이와 동시에 그는 그리스도의 신성과 인성이 연합하는 방식으로부터 하나님 나라와 세상의 차이와 변증법적 긴장관계를 설득력 있게 논증했다. 둘째, 화해와 일치에 관하여 혜암은 먼저 화해의 종말론적 차원과 우주적 차원을 강조했다. 하나님 나라에서 완성될 화해의 비전을 품고서 교회는 오늘 이곳의 현실에서 인간과 인간, 인간과 온 피조물 사이의 화해를 위해 일해야 한다. 그다음, 혜암은 하나님이 섭리로써 다스리는 세상에서 하나님의 뜻에 따라 화해의 사역을 수행하는 교회는 하나가 되어야 한다는 신념을 굳게 견지했다. 그는 종교개혁 이후에 확립된 교파주의의 현실 속에서도 신학의 차이가 교회의 통일성과 일치를 깨뜨려서는 안 된다고 생각했고, 다양성 속에서 일치를 추구해야 한다고 믿었다. 신앙의 차이 때문에 사랑의 친교에서 실패를 하는 교회가 세상에서 화해의 사역을 제대로 감당할 수 없다는 것이 혜암의 지론이었다. 끝으로, 혜암이 하나님의 선교를 수행하면서 정의를 위해 투쟁하는 교회의 일치를 강조하였고, 하나님의 선교를 둘러싼 교회의 분열을 경계하였다. 필자는 하나님의 선교를 둘러싼 가장 첨예한 논제들, 곧 개인구원과 사회구원, 교회와 국가, 선교의 자유 등에 관한 첨예한 논쟁에서 혜암이 취한 입장을 분석했다. 1) 개인구원과 사회구원에 관해 혜암은 둘이 불가분리적이어서 동시에 추구하여야 한다고 생각했다. 2) 교회와 국가의 관계에 관해서 혜암은 어거스틴과 종교개혁자들의 입장을 받아들여 하나님의 통치를 위해 세워진 두 기관의 사무적 분립과 협력을 강조하였고, 3) 선교의 자유에 대해서는 미국 헌법의 모델에 따라 국가가 교회에 관한 법률을 제정하지 않는 방식으로 신앙의 자유와 선교의 자유를 보장할 것을 주장했다. In this article, I analyze the theology of reconciliation and unity of Chang Sik Lee and evaluate its significance. To this end, I examine his historical-theological argumentation for reconciliation, then analyze his articulation of reconciliation and unity, and lastly point out that he kept a consistent view of reconciliation and unity in his opinions to conflicts and debates about the missio Dei (Mission of God). First, concerning the historical-theological argumentation for reconciliation, I pay attention to that his arguments were thoroughly Christological-oriented. From the Incarnation he drew the reality of history in which God intervenes. He identified that reconciliation is the ultimate meaning of the history that God rules by providence. He emphasized that mankind as God’s image cooperate with God in history. At the same time, he convincingly inferred the difference and dialectical tension between the kingdom of God and the world from the mysterious mode in which the divinity and the humanity of Christ are distinguished, but not separated, and united, but not confused. Second, regarding reconciliation and unity, he first emphasized the eschatological and cosmic dimensions of reconciliation. The church, which has her vision of reconciliation to be completed in the kingdom of God, must work now and here for reconciliation among human beings and between human beings and other creation. Then, he firmly believed that the church should stay in unity in her work for reconciliation in the world according to God s will. He accepted the reality of denominationalism established after the Reformation, but he argued that the difference in theology dares not to break the unity and catholicity of the one church. In this sense the church should seek unity in diversity. His main thesis is that, if the church fails in love communion because of differences in faith, she cannot properly perform the work of reconciliation in the world. Third and lastly, he emphasized the unity of the church in the struggles for justice in the mission of God. He was wary of that the debates on the following issues related to the mission of God could lead to division and schism of the church: personal salvation and/vs. social salvation, church and state, and freedom of mission. These issues broke out conflicts and confrontations between conservative and progressive churches in Korea in 1970s. In such a situation he intended to maintain the unity of the church and to articulate prudently his opinions to the three hot issues. 1) He argued that personal salvation and social salvation are inseparably related to each other, therefore both must be pursued simultaneously. 2) With regard to the relationship between church and state, he accepted the position of Augustine and the Reformers Luther and Calvin. The church and the state are two institutions established for God s reign in the world. The two institutions have their own mission, one dares not to intervene in the other’s mission, but must cooperate for the reign of God. 3) Concerning the freedom of mission, he followed the model of the United States Constitution and suggested that the following sentence should be written in the constitution of the Republic of Korea that the state shall make no law respecting religion. In that way, so he claimed, the state should guarantee freedom of faith and freedom of mission, including the freedom of the church to join the mission of God.

The Structural Sources of Security Tension in Northeast Asia

Bumjoon Kwon,Kyu Young LEE 한국국제정치학회 2017 The Korean Journal of International Studies Vol.15 No.3

Historical reconciliation has been an enduring problem in Northeast Asia and an oft-cited source of the “Asian paradox.” This article examines the varying degrees of reconciliation dynamics observed in the U.S.-Japan, China-Japan, ROK-Japan, and ROK-China dyads in order to provide a more systematic understanding of the “Asian paradox.” Contrary to the conventional wisdom that interstate reconciliation hinges upon a certain set of domestic and/or individual variables, this study posits that the process and outcome of reconciliation are determined by a particular set of structural tendencies exhibited in a dyadic relationship. More specifically, this article contends that the interaction of security and status dilemmas in the post-conflict stage can either foment or forestall reconciliation between former adversary states. Strategic incentives for reconciliation remain low when a dyad experiences a heightened sense of both security and status dilemmas; and the absence of both security and status dilemmas presents structural conditions ripe for meaningful reconciliation. Introducing a simple two-by-two model using the security-status dilemmas hypothesis, this article offers a parsimonious and generalizable theory on international reconciliation from a systemic perspective. Ranging from deep reconciliation (U.S-Japan) to no reconciliation (China-Japan), and shallow reconciliation (ROK-Japan) to latent reconciliation (ROK-China), the case studies illustrate the saliency of the security-status dilemmas model. The findings also suggest that the attendant “Asian paradox” can be construed as a byproduct of the divergent reconciliation dynamics observed in the region.

프랑스-독일의 화해와 유럽석탄철강공동체(ECSC): ‘지속가능한 평화를 위한 제도 구축 과정’으로서의 화해(1945-1951)

권수현 한국유럽학회 2024 유럽연구 Vol.42 No.1

This article considers the European Coal and Steel Community(ECSC) not only the beginning of the European integration process, but also the first institutional outcome of the reconciliation between France and Germany, and examines France's efforts and roles in leading the Franco-German reconciliation process from 1945 to 1951. Franco-German reconciliation did not remain at the stage of a peace treaty of 'conflict resolution'. The success of Franco-German reconciliation was possible because the two countries established a structure of reconciliation and continued reconciliation as a 'process'. In order to explain the reconciliation of the process, this article argues that it is necessary to analyze the mechanism of reconciliation, focusing on the motives and actors of reconciliation. The reconciliation between France and Germany was accomplished with multiple motives. France had to reconcile with Germany for practical reasons in order to cope with the economic and security realities. But fundamentally, the moral motivation for European peace influenced the reconciliation process. France was able to reconcile with Germany because of the long historical development of the idea of European integration and the experience and reflection of the Treaty of Versailles. In addition, France led European integration through reconciliation with Germany despite the emotional remnants of the war. This is because there was sufficient support of the MRP(Movement Républicain Populaire), a French Christian democratic party, for the French political leaders who presented a forward-looking view of the German problem. After all, the period from the end of World War II to the establishment of the European Coal and Steel Community was a process of establishing an institution for lasting peace in Europe beyond national interests. And the ECSC was the first institutional outcome to establish a structural peace of Franco-German reconciliation. Reconciliation between the two countries, which have long been adversaries, can be accomplished through a continuous process of effort. And the key to successful reconciliation is to form a structure to maintain reconciliation. Therefore, it is clear that the Franco-German reconciliation through the ECSC is a successful case of reconciliation in that it has established as institution for sustainable peace and continued the process.

‘역사화해’란 무엇인가 : 개념과 이론적 고찰

최성철(Choi, Seong-Cheol) 한국사학사학회 2020 韓國史學史學報 Vol.0 No.42

화해란 “싸움하던 것을 멈추고 서로 가지고 있던 안 좋은 감정을 풀어 없앰”을 뜻한다. 화해는 일상생활 외에 법률, 종교, 금융, 회계, 사회학, 정치학, 생물학 등 다양한 분야에서 활용된다. 그중 특별히 역사 안에서 이루어진, 또는 역사를 매개로 한, 아니면 역사를 대상으로 이루어진 모든 화해를 ‘역사화해’라고 부른다. 역사상 화해는 동서양을 막론하고 고대부터 현대까지 꾸준히 있었다. 역사화해에 관한 담론 또한 풍부하다. 어떤 학자들은 화해를 공동체의 공존과 공생을 위한 전략으로 이해해야 한다고 주장한다면, 또 다른 학자들은 화해를 ‘법’과 ‘정치적 정의(正義)’의 연장선상에서 정의하기도 한다. 어떤 학자들은 단순히 부담스러운 과거로부터 벗어나기 위해 역사화해가 필요하다고 주장한다면, 또 다른 학자들은 화해야말로 적대적이었던 두 공동체가 미래를 향해 동반 성장할 수 있는 최고의 수단으로 간주하기도 한다. 역사화해의 종류로는 크게 국내화해와 국제화해가 있다. 국내화해의 대표적 성공사례로 남아프리카공화국의 ‘진실과 화해 위원회(TRC)’가 있고, 국제화해의 성공사례로는 서독 수상 빌리 브란트가 바르샤바 게토 추모비 앞에서 무릎을 꿇은 사건(Kniefall von Warschau)을 들 수 있다. 최근에는 화해를 두 공동체가 서로 화합 또는 통합하기보다는 서로의 차이와 다름을 인정하고 미래를 향해 나아가는 역동적이고 복잡하며 장기적인 과정으로 이해해야 한다는 주장이 제기된다. ‘역사화해’란 어찌 보면 형용모순이다. 왜냐하면 서로 반목하고 대립과 갈등을 빚었던 어둡고 우울한 역사를 오늘날 해당 국민이 역사교육과 학습을 통해 알아가면 갈수록 화해는 점점 더 불가능해질 수 있기 때문이다. 그만큼 역사화해는 어렵고 힘들며 지난한 과정이다. 요컨대 ‘역사화해’란 과거의 역사보다도 현재, 더 넓게는 현재와 미래를 지향하는 가치개념이자 행위과정이다. Reconciliation means “a situation in which two people or groups of people become friendly again after they have argued.” Reconciliation is used in various fields such as daily life, law, religion, finance, accounting, sociology, politics, and biology. ‘Historical reconciliation’ is a generic term for all reconciliations occurred in history, mediated through history, or made through history. Throughout history, reconciliation has always existed for all ages and countries. The discourse on historical reconciliation is also abundant. Some scholars argue that reconciliation should be understood as a strategy for the coexistence of communities. Other scholars define reconciliation as an extension of ‘law’ and ‘political justice.’ Some scholars assert that historical reconciliation is necessary to simply escape from the burdensome past. Other scholars consider reconciliation to be the best way for two hostile communities to work together towards the future. The types of historical reconciliation are largely divided into domestic reconciliation and international reconciliation. One of the most successful examples of domestic reconciliation is South Africa’s “Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC).” A success story of the international reconciliation is the case of West German Chancellor Billy Brandt who knelt in front of the Warsaw ghetto memorial monument(Kniefall von Warschau). In recent years, it has been argued that reconciliation should be understood as a dynamic, complex and long-term process in which two communities recognize their differences and move toward the future rather than harmonizing or uniting with each other. In some ways, ‘historical reconciliation’ is contradictory. This is because reconciliation may become more and more impossible as citizens today learn about the dark and depressing past of antagonism, confrontation, and conflict through history education. As such, reconciliation of history is a hard and difficult process. In short, ‘historical reconciliation’ is a value concept and an action process that aims at the present and the future rather than the past history.

남북화해를 위한 한국교회의 역할

조은식(Eunsik Cho) 한국선교신학회 2012 선교신학 Vol.31 No.-

This study examines the differences and conflicts between the North and the South, briefly reviews conflicts of a unified Germany, and then focuses on issues on the unification of the Korean peninsula and reconciliation. The division of the Korean peninsula first brought separation of the land. Separation of the land brought a division of the system. The division of the system brought severance of interchange. Severance of interchange brought discontinuity of human relations. Ideological confrontation produced tension, hatred and hostility in this division. Socio−cultural differences are deeper than national homogeneity. The really important issue is how to solve this problem while preparing for reunification of Korea. One aspect of national integration after unification reconciliation between the North and the South will be a premise of solving all problems. Reconciliation is a significant Christian doctrine and the most important element for peaceful unification. Koreans should break down their barriers; social, cultural, ideological and emotional. After breaking down barriers, Koreans should restore their broken relationships. Social reconciliation on a national basis has to follow the process of repentance → forgiveness → reconciliation. However, it is not easy to carry out this logic in human history. Most offenders neither acknowledge their faults nor repent. Forgiving someone is not easy work. Christian reconciliation is however different. God initiates reconciliation through Christ, because reconciliation is the work of God. God restores the damaged humanity of the victim through a life−giving relationship with God. This experience of grace leads to action. Forgiveness by the victim and God’s grace can lead to the repentance of the offender. Here both the victim and the wrongdoer who experience reconciliation become a new creation in Christ. Like this, Christian reconciliation is as follows: reconciliation → forgiveness → repentance. The church's role for reconciliation is as follows: First, the Korean church should be capable of a prophetic role in society and has a vocation to be an agent of peace for peaceful unification and social integration. Second, the Korean Church should approach human rights in the view of faith. Third, the Korean Church supports both domestic and foreign locations in the humanitarian dimension with a heart of sharing love. Fourth, the church should provide a religious shelter to those who have a different political standpoint. Fifth, the Korean Church as a social and cultural transformer should reduce their differences and restore homogeneity by making efforts to acknowledge and understand their differences with each other. Sixth, in order to have a social responsibility, the Korean Church should stand ethically. Seeing a time of reunification, the church as a reconciler should proclaim the message of reconciliation. As a reconciler, the church should participate positively in the reconciliation movement. The Korean Church should establish a theology of reconciliation that fits the Korean context. Reconciliation is a nation task given to Korean nation and a mission given to the Korean Church. Therefore, Korean Christians should remember this and pray and prepare to contribute to the peaceful unification as a reconciler.

에큐메니칼 ‘화해’ 개념 이해

안승오(Seung-Oh Ahn) 영남신학대학교 2016 신학과 목회 Vol.45 No.-

This paper seeks the understanding of ecumenical concept of reconciliation. It studied firstly the background of this understanding. Basically the ecumenical side has a deep concern towards the world. Unfortunately, however, the created world has undergone serious conflicts in many areas such as culture, religions, economy, and genders, and so on. In addition, even the religion, which should be an element for world peace, becomes a cause of conflicts. In this situation, WCC came to have a deep concern about the matter of peace and reconciliation. The ecumenical concept of reconciliation, which appeared out of the above background, tends to have a deep concern which goes beyond the relationship between God and man towards that of God and the whole creation. This inclusiveness naturally tends not to give a priority on a certain side of reconciliation ideally. But in fact the ecumenical reconciliation tends to give the highest point on the reconciliation among men. This ecumenical concept of reconciliation with this tendency shows strengths and weaknesses as well. While the traditional concept of reconciliation tends to incline to vertical dimension strengthening mainly the reconciliation between God and men, the ecumenical concept contributed to make the church have interest in the horizontal dimension. However, it has a disadvantage as well. It is no other than the high possibility of weakening the vertical dimension as it is inclined to that of the opposite. Also it tends to weaken efficiency of mission as it includes all things into mission based on the inclusive concept of reconciliation. Furthermore, it can weaken the identity of the church as the separatrix between the church and the world becomes rather dim. To overcome these weaknesses, it seems necessary that the reconciliation between God and men needs to be accepted as the core dimension though other two are considered as well. When the other two dimensions start and get the power from the core, it would become a genuine Christian reconciliation.

남아공 ‘진실과 화해 위원회(TRC)’를 통해 본 기독교적 정의와 화해 담론

윤형철 ( Yoon Hyung Chul ) 한국복음주의신학회 2017 성경과신학 Vol.83 No.-

헌정사상 초유의 국정농단사태를 경험하면서 어느 때보다 정의를 갈망하는 한국사회에 한국교회는 어떤 기독교적 정의와 화해의 비전을 제시할 수 있을 것인가? 본 논문의 목적은 남아공의 기적을 이룬 ‘진실과 화해 위원회’(the Truth and Reconciliation Commission)의 전략과 활동을 살펴봄으로써 우리 시대와 사회를 위한 기독교적 정의와 화해 담론의 포석을 모색하는 것이다. TRC는 아파르트헤이트의 차별과 억압의 시대를 종식하고 국가 일치와 화해 증진을 위해 설립되었다. 과거사의 진실을 밝히고 화해의 공동체를 수립하기 위해 TRC가 선택한 방식은 ‘회복적 정의’, ‘우분투(Ubuntu)의 화해’, 그리고 ‘공적 스토리텔링을 통한 국가적 기억으로의 통합’으로 요약될 수 있으며, 이것들은 각각 기독교적 가치와 비전을 반영하고 있다. 첫째, TRC는 ‘응보적 정의’ 대신 ‘회복적 정의’(restorative justice)를 통해 희생자와 가해자와 공동체가 다 같이 참여하여 책임과 치유와 관계회복을 이루고자 하였다. 이는 사회적 약자들과 고통 받고 억압받는 자들을 돌아보시고 해방하시고 위로하시며, 죄인을 용서하시고 의롭다 하시고 거룩하게 만드시는 하나님의 ‘공감적 정의’(compassionate justice)와 상응한다. 둘째, TRC의 화해 개념은 어떤 사람이나 집단의 정체성과 존엄성이 공동체적 관계와 상호성 속에서 형성된다는 아프리카의 형제애와 인간성 개념인 ‘우분투’(Ubuntu)에 기반을 둔다. 아프리카의 토착사상인 우분투는 깨어진 세상을 바라보는 방식에서 성경적인 ‘샬롬’과 닮았지만, 샬롬은 이 세상의 화해와 번영의 가능성이 오직 세계 너머에서 오는 초월성으로 통해서만 가능함을 보여준다는 점에서 기독교 세계관을 더 분명하게 반영한다. 또한 샬롬의 비전은 인간 삶의 모든 관계들이 완전하고 조화롭고 정의로운 질서 속에서 기쁨을 누리는 참여와 교제의 풍요와 번영의 종결을 제시해준다. 셋째, TRC는 아파르트헤이트의 피해자와 가해자의 이야기를 공적으로 나눔으로써 그 기억을 국가적 기억(national memory)에 통합시키려 하였다. 이는 과거의 아픈 역사를 용서하되 미래를 위해서 잊지 않기 위함이다. 그리스도인 공동체의 삶의 중심에도 하나님의 구속이야기에 대한 기억과 기념과 고백과 송축이 자리 잡고 있다. ‘기억하기’는 그리스도인들이 예수의 이야기와 하나님의 구원역사에 자신들의 이야기를 통합시키는 방식이다. 더 나아가 그리스도인들은 최종적으로 기억의 구속이 일어날 종말을 믿고 고대한다. TRC의 프로세스의 세 가지 핵심개념에 상응하는 사상들은 우리 시대를 위한 기독교적 정의와 화해 담론에 긴요한 영감과 통찰을 제공해준다. What kind of Christian justice and reconciliation vision can be presented to the Korean society that is more desperate for justice than ever before by experiencing former president Park and her friend Choi’s manipulation of government affairs, which is unprecedented in constitutional history? The purpose of this paper is to explore the strategies and activities of the ‘Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa,’ which played a crucial role in the miracle of South Africa, and by so doing to find a basis for Christian justice and reconciliation discourse for our time and society. The TRC was established in order to end the period of apartheid discrimination and repression and to promote national unity and reconciliation. The TRC’s approach to clarifying the truth of past history and establishing a community of reconciliation can be summarized as ‘restorative justice’, ‘Ubuntu reconciliation’, and ‘integration into national memory through public storytelling’, Each of which, I believe, reflects Christian values and visions. First, the TRC tried to make victim, perpetrator, and community participate in achieving responsibility, healing and restoration of relationship by employing not the concept of ‘retributive justice’ but ‘restorative justice’. It corresponds to the ‘compassionate justice’ of God, who did not only look after the weak, the suffering and oppressed, but also free, comfort, forgive, justify, and sanctify sinners. Second, the TRC concept of reconciliation is based on the African concept of brotherhood and humanity, ‘Ubuntu’, which claims that the identity and dignity of any person or group can be formed only within a communal relationship and reciprocity. An indigenous idea of Ubuntu bears a close parallel to a biblical ‘Shalom’ in the way it views a broken world. But Shalom shows the Christian worldview clearly by declaring that any reconciliation and prosperity in this world is possible only through transcendence beyond this world. The vision of Shalom also would envision the abundant and prosperous eschatos of participation and fellowship, in which all the relationships of human life will be enjoying joy in perfect, harmonious and just order. Third, by publicly sharing the story of both the victims and the perpetrators of the apartheid, the TRC attempted to integrate their memories into the national memory. This is to forgive the sad history of the past but not forget it for the future. At the heart of the Christian community is the memory, commemoration, confession, and praise of God’s story of redemption. ‘Remembering’ is a way for Christians to integrate their stories into Jesus’ story and God’s redemptive history. Furthermore, Christians look forward to the redemption of memory in the final stage. These Christian ideas, which can be said to correspond to the three core concepts of the TRC process, would provide critical inspiration and insight into a Christian justice and reconciliation discourse for our time.

학교 내 효과적인 학생 화해프로그램 운영 방안에 관한 연구

임재연 한국학교사회복지학회 2021 학교사회복지 Vol.- No.55

The object of this study is exploring how to operate student reconciliation programs effectively in schools. To aim this, in-depth interviews with 13 experts of the student reconciliation program were conducted from July to Dec 2018 and were analyzed in CQR method regarding the procedures, contents, way of operation, and other factors that were commonly considered important by them. As a result, 4 big areas and 21 detailed categories are derived as procedure & contents of the reconciliation program operation: “Preparation for Reconciliation Program Operation”, “Pre-meeting for Reconciliation”, “Reconciliation meeting”, “Harvest Management”. Regarding the way of operating reconciliation program, 4 big areas with 20 categories were derived as: “How to proceed the reconciliation meeting”, “Role of the Host”, “Timing and object of Host’s intervention”, and “Perception and attitude of the Host”. The main results related to operating procedures and contents are as follows: When a student conflict occurs, what is needed in the preparation stage is to secure human resources to proceed with the program, accurately identify the issue, and obtain consent from the concerned students. At the pre-meeting stage, the host meets and talks individually with the student, and prepares for a reconciliation meeting that the students can meet and talk together. At the reconciliation meeting stage, each student should be able to fully talk about their difficulties and relieve their feelings. They also should talk about the intentions of what they’ve done, about their desire to resolve the issue, and should exchange apologies with each other. They should be able to share positive words with specific promises of action to do which can prevent a recurrence. The main results related to the method to proceed with the program are as follows: Some principles should be kept during the conversation in a reconciliation meeting, that students should repeat listening and feeling empathy through talking, listening, delivering to each other, and that students can voluntarily speak about what they want to say but should not be forced to do so. The role of the host is to help students communicate properly and intervenes at the right moment when they need help to lead them to an honest conversation. The host's perception and attitude regarding the affection and respect for students and not determining the outcome in advance are far more important than the progressive skills. Hope the results of this study can provide information and reference for successful operation and settlement of student reconciliation programs in schools. 이 연구는 학교 내 효과적인 학생 화해프로그램의 운영 방안이 무엇인지 살펴보는데 목적이 있다. 이를 위해 2018년 7월부터 12월까지 학생 화해프로그램 전문가 13명과 심층면접을 실시하였고, 전문가들이 공통적으로 중요하게 경험한 프로그램의 절차, 내용, 방식, 등에 대해 CQR방식으로 분석하였다. 분석결과 화해프로그램 운영의 절차 및 내용 관련해서 “화해프로그램 운영을 위한 준비”, “화해를 위한 사전모임”, “화해모임”, “추수관리”등 4개의 영역에 21개의 범주가 나타났고, 화해프로그램의 진행 방식 관련해서 “화해모임 진행 방식”, “진행자 역할”, “진행자 개입시점과 내용”, “진행자 인식과 태도”등 4개의 영역에 20개의 범주가 나타났다. 운영 절차 및 내용 관련 주요 결과는 다음과 같다. 학생 갈등 사안이 발생하면 프로그램을 진행할 인적자원의 확보, 사안 파악 및 해당 학생의 동의를 얻는 것이 준비단계에서 필요하다. 사전모임에서 진행자가 학생과 개별적으로 만나 대화하며 학생들이 함께 만나 대화할 화해모임을 준비한다. 화해모임에서는 각자 힘들었던 점에 대해 충분히 말하고 학생들의 감정이 해소될 수 있어야 한다. 또 행동의 의도, 해결방안 욕구에 대해 대화하고 사과를 주고받는다. 재발방지를 위한 구체적 행동의 약속과 긍정적인 말을 나누고 마친다. 진행 방식 관련 주요 결과는 다음과 같다. 화해모임에서 대화의 원리는 학생들이 서로 말하고 듣고 전달하기를 통해 경청과 공감을 반복하는 것이며, 학생이 하고 싶은 말을 자발적으로 말하도록 하고 강요하지 않는 것이다. 진행자의 역할은 학생들의 대화가 제대로 이루어질 수 있도록 돕는 것이며, 솔직한 대화로 이끌기 위해 도움이 필요한 순간에 개입한다. 학생에 대한 애정과 존중, 결과를 단정하지 않는 진행자의 인식과 태도는 진행 기술보다 중요한 진행자의 역량이다. 이 연구의 결과가 학교 내 학생 화해프로그램의 성공적 운영과 정착을 위해 참고할만한 정보를 제공할 수 있기를 기대한다.

화해 진행자가 경험한 학교폭력 피해 · 가해학생의 화해와 회복의 요인에 관한 합의적 질적연구

임재연(Jaeyoun Lim) 한국교육심리학회 2019 敎育心理硏究 Vol.33 No.3

이 연구는 화해 진행자의 화해모임 경험을 토대로 갈등 관계에 있는 학생들의 화해와 회복을 이루는데 중요한 요인이 무엇인지 살펴보는데 목적이 있다. 이를 위해 화해모임 진행 경험이 풍부한 교사 및 학교 외부 전문가 13명과 면접하고 CQR로 분석하였다. 분석 결과 학생들이 화해한다는 것의 의미, 화해를 위한 선행요건, 화해의 방해요인, 화해의 결과, 화해와 관련된 학교요인 등으로 분류되어 총 11개의 영역과 42개의 범주가 나타났다. 학생들 “화해의 의미”는 상대방과의 관계가 새롭게 변화 · 정립되는 것이며, “화해모임의 의미”는 학생이 갈등 해결의 주체가 되어 배워가는 인간적 성장의 기회이자, 재발방지의 장치이다. “화해 진행의 선행요건”은 해당 학생과 학부모의 동의, 개별적 사전모임을 통한 소통과 준비, 학생 당사자의 욕구 반영, 시간확보와 안전한 분위기 등이며, “학생 개인차원의 화해 선행요건”으로 학생 감정의 해소, 상대방에 대해 알게 됨, 자신의 책임에 대한 자각 등이 나타났다. “학교에서의 화해 방해요인”은 학교가 화해모임을 행정적 절차의 방편으로 진행함, 교사의 인식과 이해부족 및 무관심, 불명확한 사안파악, “학부모의 화해 방해요인”은 학부모가 사안과 화해모임을 잘 모름, 자녀의 친구관계 문제를 지나치게 간섭하거나 회피함, 자녀의 화해를 수용하지 못함, “학생이 가진 화해 방해요인”은 학생 개인의 심리정서적 문제 등이다. “화해의 결과로서 성장과 개선”에서 학생 내면의 힘과 대인관계에서 힘을 갖게 되고 갈등의 해결책을 찾는 등의 성장과 개선을 가져왔다. 이밖에 “화해에 대한 학교의 인식 · 문화”, “교육 구성원 간의 연계 · 협력”, “화해모임 운영을 위한 학교의 책무” 등이 학교요인으로 나타났다. 이 연구는 학생들의 화해 · 회복이 이루어지는 맥락을 탐색함으로 학교 내 효과적 화해모임 운영을 위해 필요한 요인을 살펴본 점에서 의의가 있다. This study aimed to identify important factors for reconciliation and restoration of conflicting students, based on experiences of a reconciliation meeting. Interviews were conducted with 13 teachers and external experts highly experienced in reconciliation meetings. The data were analyzed by the CQR method. The results indicated 11 domains and 42 categories including the meaning of reconciliation, precondition for reconciliation, obstacles to reconciliation, results of reconciliation, and school factors related to reconciliation. “The meaning of reconciliation” is the change and establishment of relationships between students. “The meaning of a reconciliation meeting” is an opportunity for personal growth and learning self-managed conflict resolution, and is a strategy for preventing reoccurrence of conflict. “Precondition of reconciliation” includes: agreements between relevant students and parents; communication and preparation through individual pre-meetings; reflection of the students’ needs; and the arrangement of a sufficient time period and a safe space. “Preconditions of reconciliation at the individual student level” includes: relief of negative personal emotions; understanding each other; and awareness of the student’s own responsibility. “The obstacles to reconciliation in school” consists of: the attitudes of school faculty, who hold meetings as a mere administrative procedure; the lack of understanding and indifference of teachers; and the insufficient examination of issues. “Parents’ disturbance to reconciliation” comprises: parents’ incomprehension about issues and reconciliation meetings; excessive interference or ignorance of children"s friendships; and failure to accept settlement between children. “Students’ obstacles of reconciliation” referred to the psychological issues of individual students. “Growth and improvement as a result of reconciliation” showed that the reconciliation meeting enhanced the inner strength of each student, their competence in interpersonal relationships, and their ability to find solutions to conflict. School factors affecting reconciliation included: “the perception and culture of the school surrounding reconciliation,” “connection and cooperation between educational faculty,” “responsibilities of the school for reconciliation,” etc. This study explored factors associated with effective reconciliation meetings at school by examining the context of reconciliation and restoration of students.

바울의 화해와 생명 사상 - 고린도후서 5장 17-21절을 중심으로 -

배재욱(BAE Jae-Woog) 장로회신학대학교 기독교사상과 문화연구원 2020 장신논단 Vol.52 No.1

화해를 통하여 이루어진 생명 신학의 문제는 인간 상호 간의 화해 문제가 중요하게 대두된다. 이 논문에서 필자는 고린도후서 5장 17-21절에 나타나는 화해를 생명과 관련하여 연구하고자 한다. 그래서 화해와 생명이 이 단락에서 어떻게 연관되는지 탐구하는 것이 필요하다. 인간에게 나타나는 적개심은 화해를 담보하지 않는다. 화해는 전적인 하나님의 은혜로 인간 갱신의 매체이다. 인간 각자는 말씀선포에 의해 새롭게 되었다.(참조. 벧전 1:24-25) 화해는 생명 사상에서 중요한 매개이고 중요한 요소이다. 구약성경에서 כפר는 속죄(하는 행위)를 나타낸다. 이사야 53장 7절에 나타나는 ‘여호와의 종’은 속죄 제물되신 예수 그리스도의 모습을 예견하고 있다.(참조. 행 2:36) 바울에게서 화해는 ‘그리스도 안에서’ 이루어지는 ‘하나님과 화해’란 관점으로 나타난다. 화해는 예수의 속죄 죽음을 통하여 이루어지는데,(참조. 롬 5:10) 화목제물이 되신 그리스도를 통하여 하나님은 우리와 화해하셨다. 고린도후서 5장 18-19절에서 ‘화해’는 하나님의 구원 사건으로 나타난다. 그런데 화해가 하나님의 구원과 어떻게 관련되나? 바울은 고린도후서 5장 20절에서 하나님과 화해할 것을 명하고 있다. 하나님의 구원 행위가 그리스도 안에서 성취되었으므로 그리스도 안에서 하나님의 역사를 경험할 수 있다. 고린도후서 5장 18절에서 화해 행위의 주체이신 ‘하나님’이 그리스도를 통해 화해를 성취하신다. 그리스도의 속죄 죽음을 통해 하나님이 화해를 완성하셨기 때문에(참조. 고후 5:18a) 화해 사건은 그리스도의 속죄 죽음에 근거를 가진다. 이 논문에서 필자는 “바울의 화해와 생명 사상: 고린도후서 5장 17-21절을 중심으로”를 연구하면서 먼저 “고린도후서 5장 17-21절과 화해”에 대한 이해를 위하여 1. 갱신과 화해(17절), 2. ‘그리스도 안’에서 이루어지는 화해(18-19절), 3. 화해의 전달자(20절), 4. ‘하나님의 의’를 위한 화해(21절)를 다룬 후 “화해 사건과 그리스도의 속죄 죽음과 생명” 문제를 다루었다. 화해는 그리스도의 속죄 죽음을 통해 나타난 하나님의 선물이고 화해에 이를 때 생명의 환희와 살아갈 이유를 찾을 수 있다. In this paper, I would like to study the reconciliation in 2 Corinthians 5:17-21 in relation to the issue of life. So it is necessary to explore how reconciliation and life are related to each other. Hostility in human beings does not guarantee reconciliation. Reconciliation is exclusively by the grace of God. Each human being is renewed by the proclamation of the Word (1 Peter 1: 24-25). Reconciliation is essential to life. In the Old Testament rpk refers to the acts of atonement. ‘Jehovah’s dependence’ in Isaiah 53:7 foreshadows the image of Jesus Christ as a sin offering (Acts 2:36). The reconciliation from Paul appears as a view of God’s reconciliation in Christ. The reconciliation takes place through Jesus’ atonement death (Romans 5:10). Through Christ, the fellowship offering, God reconciled us. In 2 Corinthians 5:18-19, ‘reconciliation’ appears as the salvation of God. Because God’s salvation is accomplished in Christ, we can experience God’s work in Christ. In 2 Corinthians 5:18, the subject of reconciliation is ‘God’ and reconciliation takes place through Christ. Through the atoning death of Christ, God completed the reconciliation (2 Corinthians 5:18a). The reconciliation event is based on Christ’s atonement death. Hence, I will discuss the life through reconciliation of life – to be more specific, renewal and reconciliation (v. 17), Christ as a symbol of reconciliation (v. 19), The messenger of reconciliation (v. 20)” and the reconciliation for the righteousness of God (v. 21). For reconciliation is meaningful only when it achieves God’s righteousness, and humans can find the reason to live joyfully only when one attains reconciliation.