한국 토착화신학의 실천성을 향한 선교학적 성찰

이후천 한국실천신학회 2011 신학과 실천 Vol.0 No.28

토착화신학(indigenous theology)은 선교신학에서 중요한 개념 중의 하나이다. 그리고 가장 실천적인 개념이다. 뿐만 아니라 기독교 선교의 역사는 문화와 복음의 만남을 통한 토착화의 역사이다. 복음과 문화의 만남이 크게 세 가지 차원에서 이루어지는데, 복음이 문화 속에 동화 되던지, 복음이 문화를 정복하던지, 복음과 문화가 적절히 타협하는 것이 그것이다. 우리가 잘 아는 리챠드 니버의 문화와 복음과의 관계 다섯 가지 유형과 스테븐 베반스의 상황화신학 다섯 모델 등은 이를 좀 더 확대 심화시킨 이론적 유형화이다. 그런데 이 토착화를 신학적으로 정리한 토착화신학이 한국에서는 60년대의 논쟁을 통한 이론적 성과 외에 실천적 모습을 거의 발견할 수 없다. 지금까지 한국 교회를 특징짓는 뚜렷한 토착화 된 예전이나 교회문화를 좀처럼 발견하기 힘들다는 말이다. 전통 가옥을 본 딴 예배당, 우리 가락 음악, 장례절차 및 추도예배, 성찬의 도구, 미술 등 극히 한정된 부분에서 제한된 모습만을 보여준다. 특히 90년대 이후 한국 교회의 새로운 목회 패러다임으로 등장한 현대 서구의 기독교 음악을 바탕으로 진행하는 경배와 예배에서는 토착화에 대한 가능성을 전혀 볼 수 없게 된다. 이로 인해서 한국 교회의 모습에는 서구적인 예배와 건물이 가득하고, 선교적 차원에서의 토착화 모델을 발견하기 힘든 상황이 된 것이다. 이러한 이유에서 한국 토착화 신학이 그러면 왜 비실천적이 되었는지에 대한 문제점의 지적이 필요하고, 그에 대한 대안을 모색해야 한다. 이것은 지금까지의 토착화신학이 가지고 있는 특징을 밝히는데서 시작된다. 이것을 위해 우리는 초기 토착화논쟁의 성격, 토착화신학의 주도자들로서 감리교의 대표적 토착화 신학자 윤성범, 유동식, 변선환의 간략한 경력과 그리고 이들의 신학적 특징으로서 종교신학으로서 토착화신학에 대해 살펴본다. 다음으로 이에 대한 또 다른 이해로서 교회성장학자 도널드 맥가브란의 관점에서 이해하는 토착화신학과의 비교를 통해 선교학적 성찰을시도해 본다. 결국 이 둘의 비교와 선교적 교회론의 관점에서 한국 토착화신학의 내용과 형식이 어떻게 전개되었어야 하느냐의 문제를 따지며 상황화로 나아갈 때에 교회의 실천적 문제가 해결 될 수 있다는 것을 제시하려는 것이 이글의 목적이다. Indigenous theology is one of the most important concepts of missiological theology. It is not only concerned with theory but also practical. The history of Christian mission is none other than the history of indigenization through the encounter between culture and the gospel. This encounter appears in three ways in large, which are gospel absorbed by the local culture, gospel over the culture, and gospel compromising with the culture respectively. R. Niebuhr's five models and S. Bevan's models of contextual theology are the theoretical models that deepened and expanded these three relationship model. However, no attempt has been made to provide the theoretical basis for the Korean indigenous theology in terms of practicality except for some theoretical achievements in 1960s in Korea. That is, the traditional Korean culture is only found in liturgies and church culture that represent the typical Korean church cannot easily found. Some examples of church architecture imitating traditional Korean building, church music following the traditional folk tunes, funerals liturgy and sacred things for the eucharist and paintings etc. Furthermore, the shift of pastoral paradigm of 1990s in Korean church values the modern and western Christian culture, which are found in the praise and worship in modern style. Therefore, Korean church is characterized by the modern and wester styles of worship service and buildings, and it is not easy to find the models of indigenous Christianity in a missiological aspect. It is necessary to answer the questions why the Korean indigenous theology has ignored the practicality, and to suggest alternatives to this matters. This process begins with configuring the characteristics of the current indigenous theology. This paper surveys the debates on indigenization in early periods of Korean indigenous theology. It is followed by the examination of some theologians such as Sung-bum Yoon, Dong-sik You, Sun-whan Byeon. It will also make an missiological consideration of the indigenous theology by comparing it with D. McGavran's perspectives on it. This paper will suggest that the critical examination of the forms and contents of the Korean indigenous theology with the perspective of the missional church will contribute to solving the problems of practicality in Korean church.

한국 토착화신학에 나타난 그리스도 신앙의 자기 정체성 문제

최태관(Tae Kwan Choi) 한국기독교학회 2011 한국기독교신학논총 Vol.74 No.-

This study is to explore the identity problem of Christian faith in the Korean indigenous theology in the critical view of Christian faith by Ernst Troeltsch. The key point of this study lies in the recognition that Christian faith finds the solution of the identity problem of Christian faith in one`s culture. With such a presupposition, I seek to explain how the identity problem of Christian faith in the Korean indigenous problem involves both the theological hermeneutics on the historical Jesus and the normative way in which Christian community is related to the life of the historical Jesus. In order to make sense of such a premise, Troeltsch employs the methods of analogy, critique, and correlation which can illuminate the shortcomings of the Korean indigenous theology in terms of the identity problem. I present some critical points that the Korean indigenous theology caused the crisis of the identity of Christian faith by weakening the normative significance of the historical Jesus. But this does not nullify the positive contribution on the part of the Korean indigenous theology. In particular, it sheds light on the future of religious pluralism in the way that deepens inter-religious dialogue. Of course, the dialogue must not be directed to loose the unique aspect of Christian faith traditions which are traced back to the personality of the historical Jesus. In this context, Sun-Hwan Byun, a pioneering indigenous theologian, has made contribution to the cooperative dialogue between Christianity and Buddhism in terms of the Korean indigenous theology, seeking to formulate a common ground of religious symbol in the Korean cultural context. Simultaneously, he was also inclusive of Minjung theology as an appropriate discourse of liberating Minjung. Sungbum Yun, another Korean indigenous theologian, interpreted the concept of the Confucian virtue ``Sung``(誠) creatively as Christ event, namely the embodiment of the historical Jesus. Envisioning that this virtue is shared broadly in reality, he expected to organize a Christian community in which ``Sung`` is fulfilled. However, the consequences betrayed his expectation. That is, the formation of identity of Christian faith should be in order, reminding that the normative meaning of the historical Jesus for Christian community cannot be ruled out, albeit in open relationship to other religions. Thus, Troeltsch`s concept of the ``common spirit`` needs to be developed in the inter-religious dialogues among the Korean indigenous theologians. Further, this study argues that the Korean indigenous theology should contribute to the development of religious praxis in the setting of religious pluralism. In other words, the Korean indigenous theology should reinterpret and reconstruct Christian truth claims in the way that reinforces Christian identity and nurture Christian faith community. This future task goes in parallel with the continuous efforts to highlight the unique features of other religions, thus bringing to fruition the common spirit of the religious pluralism. In this context, Ernst Troeltsch`s discussion on Christian faith is useful methodologically for the Korean indigenous theology.

변선환 신학의 세 가지 특징과 그 의의 - 그의 ‘신론’을 중심으로

김광현(Gim Gwanghyeon) 삼육대학교 신학연구소 2018 신학과 학문 Vol.22 No.-

Every theology is born in the setting of its own time and space. However, the Korean theological circle has not yet sufficiently produced its theological outcomes reflecting properly its own time and space. In this circumstance Byun Sun-Hwan is a representative Korean theologian who endeavored to unfold his own theolgy. The fact that his theolgy is called “the theology of religious liberation” means that he inherits critically religious theology and Minjung theology. This essay examined his theological characteristics centering on his four papers which contain ‘the doctrine of God’ and explored what it means to current Korean theological circles. It is the main point of this essay that his theology contains contemporary modernity, indigenous subjectivity, and universality of Minjung. Finally it is proposed that this characteristic can be not only a signpost for the Indigenous Theology or the Korean theology but also the direction which the theology should aim for

신학의 ‘토착화’와 ‘지역화’ 사이에서 - 로버트 슈라이터의 ‘지역신학’ 담론을 중심으로

김태연 한신대학교 한신신학연구소 2013 신학연구 Vol.50 No.1

Robert Schreiter's concept of local theology has been rendered as “indigenous(to'chak) theology” into Korean, even though he clarified the reason why he intentionally eschewed the term “indigenous theology” in his book, Constructing Local Theologies. This study attempts to reflect on the Korean Translation of “indigenous theology” as “to'chak theology” and its limited ability to theologize in the local context. After exploring this concept, with the help of the term, “tobal”(土發, literally: sprung out of the ground)-theology, we can consider Schreiter's concept of “local theology”. Its meaning can broaden our previous horizon for constructing theologies based on local contexts. In his book Schreiter calls on Christians in the West to reflect on their interdependence in colonialism and the eurocentric mindset toward the churches in the third world. He suggests that “local theologies” could be constructed in the active organic interaction between the gospel, culture and churches, employing a semiotic approach to understanding the local culture. It gives us a chance to reconsider how Korean missionary work has been hitherto conducted in a cross-cultural context: instead of attaching a great importance to the quantitative growth of churches in mission fields and concentrating solely on propagating the gospel, it is more important to help the gospel be embodied in its local context.

토착화 신학의 흐름과 재고: 윤성범, 변선환, 이정배를 중심으로

이한영(Lee Hahn-Young) 한신대학교 신학사상연구소 2009 신학사상 Vol.0 No.147

이 글은 감리교신학대학교 토착화신학자들의 사상을 역사적인 관점에서 정리하고 평가하며 이를 토대로 소위 제3세대 토착화 신학이 나아갈 방향이 어디에 있는가 하는 것을 짚어보기 위한 목적을 가지고 있다. 오늘날 일각에서는 탈주체, 탈민족, 탈전통, 탈문화라는 탈토착화의 관점에서 토착화 신학을 바라보고 있다. 그리고 가난, 억압 등에 무관심한 비정치적인 신학이 아닌가하는 관점이 존재한다. 이러한 물음들에 답하면서 복음의 뿌리내리기라는 인상을 풍기는 토착화라는 개념이 지금에도 여전히 유효한가 하는 물음에 대해서도 돌아보고자 한다. 이 글은 개념적인 논쟁의 자리가 아니라, 토착화 신학이 주장해 온 사상적 발자취를 시간의 자리(역사)와 장소적 자리(이 땅)라는 관점에서 되돌아보고자 했다. 그리고 이러한 과정을 통해서 위에서 던진 물음들이 과연 토착화 신학에 대한 올바른 물음이며, 역으로 토착화 신학은 그러한 물음들에 대해 어떻게 응답해 왔는가 하는 것을 규명하고자 했다. 이것은 문화적 아 프리오리로서의 토착화 신학과 한국적 신학으로서의 성의 신학을 주창하여 독특한 한국적 사상을 전개했던 윤성범의 신학, 비서구화의 출발점을 다원주의로 발전시켰으며, 비서구화 연대로서의 토착화 신학과 민중신학을 합류시키려는 시도 속에서 종교해방신학을 주장했던 변선환의 신학, 이 두 스승을 계승하면서도 생명의 문제를 성령론과 수행론의 관점에서 풀어감으로써 토착화 신학의 새로운 전환을 시도했던 이정배의 신학이 가지는 의미와 평가에 대한 것들이다. 그리고 이러한 작업들이 현재 다문화 시대, 교차적 문화시대를 살아가는 토착화 제3세대의 방향을 제시하는 좋은 지침서가 될 것으로 기대한다. This article is written to inspect and evaluate thoughts of indigenization theology. And it have a intention to find where the third generation of indigenization theology is. it is also an answer to some postmodern’s perspective that have a argument of nosubject, no-nation, no-tradition, no-culture and strong politic interest. On the other side, it reviews that the concept “indigenization”does still have the validity and fitness in Korean situation 21c today. I look back to upon the trace from past to presence of indigenization theology with such questions, and examine whether it is right or not. On the contrary, I make a close inquiry into how indigenization theology have answered that question. That is the study of theological succession and differentiation of indigenization theology: Yoon sung-bum’s “theology of sung(誠), Byun sun-hwan’s “theology of religion and liberation”, Lee jungbae’s “Korean theology of life.”

토착화 신학과 공동체 윤리 : 해천의 효윤리를 중심으로

이찬석 한국기독교사회윤리학회 2009 기독교사회윤리 Vol.17 No.-

Seongbeum Yoon, who is a Koran indigenous theologian, suggested ‘Sung Theology’as a Korean Theology in 1970’s. His Sung Theology became the first Korean theology even though some Korean theologians evaluated it negatively. Later, Yoon investigated the Filial Piety of Confucianism, and suggested the theology of the filial piety focusing on ethics. In the theology of filial piety, Yoon insisted that Western ethic can be called individual ethic but Eastern ethic is communitarian ethic. Interestingly, he categorized Christian and Judaic ethic as communitarian ethic. He clearly insisted that it is a seriously error to identify Christian ethic with Western individual ethic. Therefore, he insisted that Christianity and Judaism are not Western religion but Eastern religion, which based on the ethic of the filial piety, and began with the family. Therefore, the first purpose of this article engaged on why Western ethic is individual ethic. The second purpose is why Eastern ethic becomes communitarian ethic. The third purpose is how Christian and biblical ethic are Eastern and communitarian ethic. Lastly, this article tries to evaluate Yoon’s ethic of the filial piety from the perspective of Korean Indigenous Theology. It is clear that Yoon’s ethic of the filial piety contributed to Korean indigenous theology in the sense of Post-Westernization. Furthermore, it is more subjective Korean Theology than his Sung Theology. However, his notion of the filial piety does not liberate from Sexism, and identifies community with relationship. This article suggests that community and relationship should be differentiated. Furthermore, this article insists that Western thought and should be understood as ‘relational thought focusing on individual’, and Eastern thought as ‘relational thought focusing community in the era of globalization. As a whole, this paper suggests that ‘relationship’ should be the key world for Korean Indigenous Theology and Christian ethic in the era of globalization.

웨슬리신학의 전통에서 본 한국의 감리교신학과 성결교신학

최인식(In Sik Choi) 한국기독교학회 2013 한국기독교신학논총 Vol.86 No.-

This paper presents the commonality and uniqueness of theological main ideas of the Korean Methodist Church(KMC) and Korea Evangelical Holiness Church(KEHC). Additionally, it demonstrates that the theologies of KMC and KEHC could form consensus with each other within the tradition of Wesleyan theology. It also asserts that if the two theological traditions could be successful in creating a harmony with one another in the dissimilar theological points, a great theological accomplishment will be achieved for the ecumenical unity. In this essay, the Social Sanctification theology and the Indigenous theology among KMC theologies are representatively chosen for the dialogue with KEHC theology. Here, the Spirit Baptism (or Holiness) theology and the Fourfold Gospel theology are theologically important. Social Sanctification theology is coupled with Spirit Baptism theology, while Indigenous theology is coupled with the Fourfold Gospel theology. The couples presumably look like conflicting claims. However, we argue that each pair could be understood complementarily. Our conclusion is deduced from the theological method of Wesleyan creative synthesis. Like John Wesley, we maintain the evangelic balance between tradition of the church and reality of life, absolute grace of God and responsibility of human beings, social sanctification and personal holiness, and reasonable rationality and pious experience. Theologies of KMC and KEHC have their own historical backgrounds and theological confessions. We try to find not only their uniqueness but also their complementary points, which have been neglected from further studies.

Sung-Bum Yun’s Theology of Sung (誠): Focusing on the Confucian Concept of Sung as Christ in relation to Karl Barth’s Christocentric Theology

김영관 한국기독교학회 2022 한국기독교신학논총 Vol.125 No.-

The primary purpose of this paper is to explore Sung-Bum Yun’s Theology of Sung (誠), which is radically influenced by Karl Barth’s Christocentric theology as well as Korean Confucianism. Sung-Bum Yun (1916-1989) was one of Barth’s students in Basel and the best known interpreter of Barth’s theology and the most influential theologian of the Methodist Church of Korea. Yun maintains that theological indigenization of the Gospel of Jesus Christ on the basis of Karl Barth’s Christ-centered theology can be a basic step for the formation of an indigenous Korean Confucian-Christian theology. He published many Barth-related books and articles in terms of the Confucian concepts of Sung as Jesus Christ, thus his theological characteristics are distinctively Christocentric in accordance with those of Karl Barth. Accordingly this paper explores how Barth has influenced one representative Korean indigenous theological movement such as Sung-Bum Yun’s theology of Sung, with specific stress on how Yun has responded to Barth’s Christocentric theology, especially on the basis of the Korean people’s centuries long-inherited socio-cultural-religious tradition of Confucianism.

개혁주의신학 관점에서의 유동식의 『韓國神學의 鑛脈』(1982) 분석

안수강(Ahn, Su-Kang) 신학과 실천학회 2022 신학과 복음 Vol.12 No.-

This research aims to analyze Professor Dong-Sik Ryu’s Vein of Korean Theology(1982) from the reformed theological standpoint. I considered the important thoughts and points revealed in this book as follows. Firstly, in macroscopic approach I analyzed basic ideas of Pung-ryudo, ‘han meosjin sarm’ as the basis of all the religions, three veins of ‘han meosjin sarm’ in Korean theology. Secondly, on the basis of Ryu’s Pung-ryudo theology, I focused on periodic developments of Korean theology such as embryonic stage(1900s), radicate stage(1930s), formative stage(1960s and 1970s), and so forth. Thirdly, I studied Ryu’s theological discourses such as view of trinity, universality of churches, relativism and absolutism of Christianity, indigenization theology and religious syncretism, interaction among ‘conservatism, progressivism, and liberalism’, methodology of indigenization, Gyeong-Ok Jeong’s faith, significance of indigenization theology in the age of globalization, establishment of Joseon seminary, verbal inspiration and biblical inerrancy, and so on from the reformed theological standpoint.

토착화와 메타모포시스

방원일 숭실대학교 한국기독교문화연구원 2021 한국기독교문화연구 Vol.16 No.-

The purpose of this article is to reflect on the Indigenization theology’s debates in the 1960s and develop the metamorphosis cultural theory by comparing them with Goethe's botanical theory. Indigenization theologians argued that Christianity is composed of the gospel and culture, and that the seeds of the gospel take root in different cultural soils, forming various forms of Christianity. But the gospel and culture, the seed and the soil are not so easily divided, and the debate has raged. However, the logic of rejecting acculturation while insisting on cultural change resulted in theological argument emphasizing the essence of faith. In the later Indigenization theology, the discussion went one step further by proposing methodological syncretism that the inculturation inevitably entails syncretism. The German poet Goethe has proposed a unique botany that explains plant growth through metamorphosis, a process in which an archetypal plant transforms into its roots, stems, and forward. He explained the growth of plant individuals and the formation of plant species through metamorphosis. Indigenization theology and Goethe's botany have in common that they establish the matrix of change while explaining it. In Indigenization theology, it is the concept of the seed, and in Goethe's botany, it is the archetypal plant. Goethe's archetypal plant is a more flexible concept than the solid identity of the seed metaphor. Through reexamining the points of contention encountered when Indigenization theology tried to explain changes in Christianity, and referring to the archetype concept and types of transformation in Goethe's botanical theory, we can systematize metamorphosis theory of culture. 이 글의 목적은 1960년대 우리나라에서 진행된 토착화 신학 논쟁을 재고찰하고 괴테의 식물학 이론과 비교함으로써 메타모포시스 문화 이론을 정교화하는 것이다. 토착화(土着化)는 복음이라는 씨앗이 다른 문화의 토양에서 움터 뿌리내림으로써 새로운 형태의 기독교를 형성하는 과정이다. 토착화 신학자들은 기독교가 복음과 문화로 구성되어 있고, 복음의 본질이라는 씨앗이 가기 다른 문화적 토양에서 뿌리 내리는 양상에 따라 다양한 모습의 기독교를 형성한다고 주장하였다. 그러나 복음과 문화, 씨앗과 토양은 그렇게 간단히 나누어지지 않기에 논쟁이 격렬해졌다. 토착화 신학자들은 토착화가 부분별한 혼합이 아니라고 주장하였다. 그러나 문화의 변동을 주장하면서 문화접변을 거부하는 논리는 신앙의 본질을 강조하는 신학적 주장으로 귀결되었다. 후기 토착화 신학에서는 토착화가 혼합을 필연적으로 수반한다는 방법론적 혼합주의를 제안하여 논의가 한 단계 진전되었다. 독일의 시인 괴테는 식물의 생장을 원형 식물이 뿌리, 줄기, 앞으로 변형하는 과정, 즉 메타모포시스로 설명하는 독자적인 식물학을 제안한 바 있다. 그는 메타모포시스를 통해 식물 개체의 성장, 나아가 식물 종의 형성을 설명하였다. 토착화 신학과 괴테 식물학은 변화를 설명하면서 변화의 모태를 설정한다는 공통점이 있다. 토착화 신학에서 씨앗 개념이 그것이고, 괴테 식물학에서는 원형 잎, 원형 식물이 그것이다. 괴테의 원형 식물은 씨앗에 내재한 구조라는 점에서 토착화 신학과 비슷해 보이기도 하지만, 형태적 변화가 자유롭다는 점에서 씨앗 비유의 단단한 정체성보다 유연한 개념이다. 토착화 신학이 기독교의 변화를 설명하고자 했을 때 부딪혔던 논쟁의 지점들을 재점검하고, 괴테의 식물학 이론에서 원형 개념과 변형의 유형을 참고하는 것은 우리가 문화의 메타모포시스를 체계화하는 데 긴요한 이론적 자원이 될 것이다.