기독교교육의 잃어버린 보화: discipline

오춘희(Choon-Hee Oh) 한국기독교교육정보학회 2014 기독교교육정보 Vol.0 No.41

기독교교육만이 위기가 아니라 교육전반이 위기 상황에 있다. 이 논문은 이러한 교육에 있어서 위기가 교육의 철학이나 현장에서 discipline이 사라졌기 때문이라고 분석하였다. 교육의 지배적인 사조가 무신론적인 인본주의와 반권위적인 교육에 치우침으로 인간을 인간답게 만드는 교육인 discipline이 폄하하게 되었다는 것을 서술하였다. 이를 극복하기 위하여 성경적인 교육인 discipline의 다의적인 의미를 살펴보았고, 기독교교육의 장에서 이를 회복해야 할 것을 주장하였다. 흔히 discipline에 대하여 부정적인 인상을 갖게 되는 이유인 체벌의 문제를 논하였고 체벌은 discipline의 극히 일부분에 불과함으로 체벌 때문에 discipline을 거부하는 것은 옳지 못함을 주장하였다. 기독교교육의 세 가지 주요한 현장인 가정, 교회, 학교에서 어떻게 discipline을 해야 할 것인지 그 방향성을 제시하였다. The purpose of this study was to discover the meaning of discipline in current educational practice with fading meaning and confusion, and to apply it to all fields in Christian education. This paper consisted of three parts. The first part focused on the secular philosophy of modern education and practice since the 19th century. It revealed that the mainline philosophy of education during the 20th century was humanistic and anti-authoritative, whereby the notion of discipline was increasingly minimized. The second part discussed the various meanings of discipline and an offensive aspect of discipline namely, physical punishment. It argued the physical punishment was only one part of discipline and should not be over-emphasized. In the last part, the necessity of discipline in three major Christian education fields was examined, and it suggested the way how to apply discipline at home, and in the churches and schools to provide genuine Christian education. This study concluded Christian education should recover discipline so that it can revive a true Christianity in education.

징벌제도와 천정환의 회복적 징벌론

천정환,이동임 한국교정학회 2013 矯正硏究 Vol.- No.61

수용자에 대한 징벌론은 역사적으로 응보적 징벌론, 교육적 징벌론, 회복적 징벌론, 복지적 징벌론으로 개념지울 수 있다. 그러나 수용자에 대한 기존의 징벌관련 법령은 아직도 보안중심의 응보적 징벌론과 가해자 중심의 교육적 징벌의 성격에 그치고 있다. 그리고 수용자에 대한 징벌의 개선방안에 대한 기존의 선행연구들은 거의 모두가 징벌제도의 정당성 등 절차적 측면과 징벌제도의 비인간성 등의 인권적 측면에서 접근 해 오고 있어 회복적 징벌론이나 복지적 징벌론을 간과하고 있다. 따라서 여기에서는 기존의 선행 연구들이 간과한 회복적 징벌론을 사견으로 주장하고 회복적 징벌의 한계와 대안으로서 복지적 징벌론을 개선방안으로 제시하고자 한다. 그전에 기존의 논문처럼 징벌제도의 문제점에 대하여는 절차적 측면과 인권적 측면을 운론하기로 한다. I would like to assert originally the new restorative discipline theory which has a connection with restorative justice and social welfare discipline theory which has relevance to social welfare practice technigue which is contray to retribution penal ideology and educational penal ideology approach. There are four kinds of discipline theory in connection : retributive discipline , educational discipline, restorative discipline theory, social welfare discipline theory. But, existing studies and correctional law have approached in the view of the human rights and procedural legitimacy for the discipline system of prisoners which leaves "victim" and "social welfare approach in discipline" out of consideration. Therefore, a good place to start is to assert in the restorative discipline th대ry which is relevant to victim and social welfare discipline theory with social welfare technical approach which existing studies have passed over about it.

‘철저함과 온건함’ (Severitas et Clementia) : 칼빈의 교회 권징(Church Discipline)의 두 원리와 교회론적 배경 연구

김요섭(Kim, Yo-sep) 한국개혁신학회 2009 개혁논총 Vol.12 No.-

This study examines the principles of John Calvin's idea of church discipline and the ecclesiological foundation of his principles. For Calvin, while the true doctrine is the "soul" of the church, discipline is "sinew" without which the whole body of the church cannot be maintained. It is his first principle that church discipline should be practiced strictly and rightly according to the ordination of God. Calvin himself proposed to establish the Consistory, an ecclesiastical court, when he returned to Geneva in 1541, and endeavored to enforce church discipline strictly according to the Word. Second, Calvin stresses that discipline should be executed with moderation. For Calvin, church discipline is not an eternal anathema of a sinner, and he does not attempt to build a theocracy by means of strict discipline in Geneva. Contrary to this, he considers church discipline as the provision of an opportunity for repenting one's misbehaviors and the prevention of the further contamination. Between the two principles of strictness and moderation, Calvin argues that the ultimate aim of church discipline is to serve to realize and expand Christ's Kingdom through the ministry of the church in an eschatological way. For Calvin, discipline does not aim to achieve perfect holiness of the church, because the visible church in this world cannot attain the perfection holiness until Christ comes again and judges the hypocrite in this church. Until that day, therefore, discipline ought not to be executed eternally and finally like the anathema of God. It is thus probable that Calvin does not include discipline in his external marks of the true church because of his eschatological idea of the holiness of the church. Compared to the two marks of the true church, the right preaching of the Word and the pure administration of sacraments, discipline cannot be regarded as the element of the esse of the church. However, Calvin also insists the importance of church discipline that the church cannot carry out its role of preaching and teaching the Word as the agent of Christ's Kingdom without order and correction through discipline. Calvin's two principles of strictness and moderation, and his idea of the church as the eschatological agent of the Kingdom of Christ are still useful for the present Korean church to maintain order and holiness by recovering the "reformed principle and practice" of church discipline.

교단의 권징재판과 사회법정의 권징재판

황규학 ( Guihag Hwang ) 한국교회법학회 2014 교회와 법 Vol.1 No.1

The discipline judgement in the denomination is similar to a civil law and an administrative law of a civil court. But compared with a civil court, the discipline judgement in the denomination court is a discipline action to correct church congregation including pastors and elders violating the church government and Bible. Those who are not subjective to the final decision of church court in the denomination appeal a civil court. But because secular courts lack the authority or competence to determine religious questions such as a dogma, a discipline, they dismiss most of the suits of discipline. However, recently a civil court had judged a case of a discipline which had been judged in a church court. A kind of discipline case judged as a civil court is a case with a legal relationship related to church property. Second, a kind of discipline case judged in a civil case is a case through an invalid process. Third, a civil court goes to trial a case which lacks social justice when placing judgement in a church court. Compared with Korean civil court, American civil court does not go to trial a case regarding religious questions even though there is an invalid process with church discipline. Korean supreme court also does not judge a case of discipline with minimal process problems, but judge cases with serious invalid processes. In conclusion, this article deals with relationship between a church court and a civil court related to church discipline and emphasizes disciplinary subject changing from denomination to church congregation according to a subject who has owner over church property.

개신교단의 권징결의와 사회법정의 권징재판

황규학(Hwang Gui Hag) 중앙대학교 법학연구원 2013 法學論文集 Vol.37 No.2

The discipline judgement in the denomination is similar to a civil law and an administrative law of a civil court. But compared with a civil court, the discipline judgement in the denomination court is a discipline action to correct church congregation including pastors and elders violating the church government and Bible. Those who are not subjective to the final decision of church court in the denomination appeal a civil court. But because secular courts lack the authority or competence to determine religious questions such as a dogma, a discipline, they dismiss most of the suits of discipline. However, recently a civil court had judged a case of a discipline which had been judged in a church court. A kind of discipline case judged as a civil court is a case with a legal relationship related to church property. Second, a kind of discipline case judged in a civil case is a case through an invalid process. Third, a civil court goes to trial a case which lacks social justice when placing judgement in a church court. Compared with Korean civil court, American civil court does not go to trial a case regarding religious questions even though there is an invalid process with church discipline. Korean supreme court also does not judge a case of discipline with minimal process problems, but judge cases with serious invalid processes. In conclusion, this article deals with relationship between a church court and a civil court related to church discipline and emphasizes disciplinary subject changing from denomination to church congregation according to a subject who has owner over church property.

주박 스테이 프로그램에 나타난 영성훈련적 특징

유재경(Jae-Kyoung Yoo) 영남신학대학교 2018 신학과 목회 Vol.49 No.-

Christian spiritual discipline is a regular and consistent training practised by Christians who have experienced God’s grace and who look to become like Jesus Christ. Christian spiritual discipline holds a purpose such as “holiness” and “likeness to Jesus Christ”. Such practice symbolises the discipline given in the Bible and it includes self-training and group training. The discipline method suggested in the Bible is sufficient for Christian spiritual discipline. The discipline allows the one into the depth of Gospel, and the practice itself is not the goal but means to an end. The Stay programme at the Wol-bae Church is not a simple community group training but a spiritual discipline. Poster is a Christian Spirituality academic who dedicated his life to the study of Christian Spiritual Discipline. He used the word Spiritual Discipline for the first time in the modern time. His three spiritual discipline methods are all included in the Wol-bae church’s Stay programme. What’s more, the Stay programme is 2 days long programme, so it has an advantage of being a short intensive discipline programme. Therefore, Wol-bae church’s Stay programme can contribute to the recovery of an individual, a family and a society. Amidst the various spiritual discipline methods in the Stay programme, there are 4 key essential factors. They are hospitality, confession, guidance and deep fellowship. Hospitality is one of oldest and traditional discipline method in the Christian Spirituality. Hospitality is an act of opening one’s space and heart for someone else. In warm and happy welcome, salvation and healing can occur. Confession is at the very core of the relationship with God and with people. We can find evidences of guidance in early churches as well as middle age churches. Also it has an important role in how we live our lives now. All of these factors are part of Wol-bae church’s Stay programme. Through these discipline methods, we expect the Stay programme to really serve and contribute to the individuals, the church and the local community.

권징(Church Discipline)의 교회론적 의의

박혜근 ( Hae Geun Park ) 개혁신학회 2013 개혁논총 Vol.26 No.-

Today we see the church has fallen away from the pure preaching of the word of God and there is no purity in the church as church discipline is not exercised. When you exercise church discipline you could be considered as a false teacher, like a cult leader. Many would say it is important to love the church members and church discipline will contradict with the great commandment of God`s love. However, love and truth cannot be separated. One of the greatest achievements of the Reformation was the recovery of the Gospel. The recovery of the gospel included many things the church had lost for long time. It restored, first of all, the doctrine of justification that man is justified by faith only. It also included the recovery of the highest authority of the Bible on the faith and the life of the believers, the pure preaching of the gospel, and the sacraments which had been grossly abused by the Roman Catholic Church till the Reformation. But these were not all that had been achieved by the Reformation, and particularly by John Calvin. By the time of the Reformation church discipline was corrupted and abused as seriously as sacraments. The restoration of church discipline to its rightful use and appreciation in the church was thus Calvin`s main concern when he began his ministry in Geneva. He was committed to the recovery of church discipline and his efforts on behalf of it continued to 1555 when the magistrates finally conceded to the church council the right of excommunication. Calvin acknowledged that the visible church could never be perfect. Christ so loved the Church that by dying for her she would be sanctified by the washing of the water with the word and be presented to Him blameless, holy and blemish(Ephesians 5:25-27). However in the visible church the wheat always exists with the chaff. Thus, until the return of Christ, and the purification of the bride, there is a need for church discipline. Church discipline is necessitated in Calvin`s ecclesiology. This paper aims at examining the interrelationship between Calvin`s ecclesiology and church discipline. Five aspects, considered to be necessary to fulfil this aim, are examined. Church discipline: its necessity; church discipline: its usefulness (function); church discipline: its purpose; church discipline: its limits; and church discipline: its subject.

‘훈육’의 교육적 의미의 재해석

김선혜(Kim Sun-Hye) 한국열린교육학회 2006 열린교육연구 Vol.14 No.2

  본 연구는 일반적인 특성을 지녀온 까닭에 아직도 부정적인 의미로 통용되고 있는 ‘훈육’에 대하여 교육활동 속에서의 중요성에 비추어 좀더 새로운 차원에서 긍정적인 의미로 해석하려는 시도이다. 이를 위해서는 훈육의 의미 규정에 뒷받침이 될 만한 몇 가지 준거 즉, 훈육에 대한 기본 전제, 개념, 목적을 찾아 논의하고, 이를 토대로 교육과 관련지었다. 그 결과 훈육은 새로운 의미를 가져야 하는 정당성을 찾게 되었다. 첫째로, 훈육은 교육활동에서 매우 광범위한 영역을 차지하는 것으로, ‘휴머니즘’을 전제로 해야 한다는 것이다. 둘째로, 훈육은 교육의 개념을 어느 정도 포괄하는 의미를 지님으로써, 교육에 대한 다양한 개념 정의 가운데 하나인 개인의 자기실현으로서의 ‘자기발전과 성장을 위한 과정’으로 규정되어야 한다는 것이다. 셋째로, 훈육은 교육의 목적을 달성하는 데 중요한 역할을 하는 것으로, 이를 위한 기초로서 ‘자기통제를 통한 자기훈육’의 목적을 지녀야 한다는 것이다. 훈육에 대한 새로운 해석은 교육에서의 훈육의 중요성을 정당화함으로써 교육활동을 효율적으로 실천하는 데에 기초가 되며, 훈육의 방향성을 찾아내는 데에 도움을 줄 것으로 본다.   The purpose of this study is to reinterpret the educational significance of discipline. For this purpose, it is needed to prescribe philosophy, conception, and aim of discipline and connection with education.<BR>  The results of this study are as follows: First, the philosophy of discipline is children respect, namely, humanism. Second, the conception of discipline is the process of development and growth as a person. Third, the aim of discipline is self-discipline through self-control.<BR>  So, the factors of education are related to discipline. Discipline needs to be viewed as an essential component of education and absolutely critical to the development of healthy individuals. The most fundamental purpose of discipline is the development of self-control. Self-control is one of the most important outcomes of education and a basic prerequisite for a democratic society. In conclusion, this study is justifies an importance of discipline and offer to a new significance of discipline in education.

'신학은 학문이다'와 '신학은 학문이 아니다' 두 명제는 양립가능한가?

김종희 개혁주의생명신학회 2024 생명과 말씀 Vol.40 No.3

본 고는 개혁주의 안에서 나타난 두 명제, 즉 신칼빈주의의 ‘신학은 학문이다’와 개혁주의생명신학의 ‘신학은 학문이 아니다’의 양립가능성을 연구하였다. ‘신학은 학문이다’ 명제는 신학의 세속화 비판, 신학의 독립성 보존, 그리고 신학의 보편성 강조를 의미한다. 반면, ‘신학은 학문이 아니다’ 명제는 신학의 사변화 비판, 성경적 신학의 회복, 그리고 교회를 살리는 신학의 강조를 함축한다. 이러한 두 명제의 양립가능성을 일반은혜와 특별은혜 관점에서, 보편사와 구속사의 관점에서, 그리고 세 유형의 신학 관점에서 논구한 결과는 다음과 같다. ‘신학은 학문이다’ 명제는 신학의 거룩한 성격에서 시작하여 학문적으로 독립적인 신학의 위치로 강조점을 옮겼다. 반면, ‘신학은 학문이 아니다’ 명제는 신학의 학문성을 인정하면서도 성경의 복음을 핵심으로 하는 신학의 본질에 그 강조점을 두었다. 즉, 두 명제는 신학의 원천이 성경이라는 점에서는 공통적이지만, 전자는 신학의 학문적 방법을 강조하고 후자는 신학의 본질인 성경의 내용을 강조했다는 점에서 차이가 발견된다. 이런 점에서 전자가 일반은혜 측면을 강조했다면, 후자는 특별은혜 측면을 강조했다. ‘신학은 학문이다’ 명제가 교회를 위한 신학을 전제하면서 다른 학문과 동등한 학문성을 강조했다면, ‘신학은 학문이 아니다’ 명제는 신학의 학문성을 전제하면서도 교회를 살리는 신학의 역할을 강조했다. 이 점에서 전자가 그리스도인들이 비그리스도인들과 함께 살아가는 세상의 보편사적 영역에서의 신학을 강조했다면, 후자는 그리스도인들로 구성된 교회의 구속사적 영역에서의 신학을 강조한 것이라 할 수 있다. 그리스도인들에게 모두 해당되는 보편사와 구속사 중에서, 시대적으로 당면한 문제 해결책으로 신칼빈주의는 보편사적 영역을 강조하고 개혁주의생명신학은 구속사적 영역을 강조한 것으로 평가된다. ‘신학은 학문이다’ 명제는 급진적인 알렉산드리아학파의 영향으로 야기된 신학의 세속화를 비판하고, 종교학으로 전락할 위기에서 교회 중심의 안디옥학파적 신학의 특징을 재정립하면서도, 온건한 알렉산드리아학파적 요소를 회복하고 이를 강조한 것으로 보인다. 반면, ‘신학은 학문이 아니다’ 명제는 지속적인 알렉산드리아학파적 영향으로 사변화되어 교회의 세속화를 야기한 신학을 비판하고, 알렉산드리아학파적 특징인 학문성을 인정하면서도, 안디옥학파의 성경적 특징을 강조하였다. 전자가 신학의 안디옥학파적 기초 위에서 알렉산드리아학파적 특징을 강화했다면, 후자는 신학의 알렉산드리아학파적 특징을 인정하면서도 안디옥학파적 요소의 회복을 강조한 것으로 평가될 수 있다. 이처럼 신칼빈주의의 ‘신학은 학문이다’ 명제가 일반은혜와 보편사와 온건한 알렉산드리아학파적 요소를 강조한 반면, 개혁주의생명신학의 ‘신학은 학문이 아니다’ 명제는 특별은혜와 구속사와 안디옥학파적 요소를 강조한 것으로 평가될 수 있다. 동시에 각각 강조되지 않은 부분들은 전제와 인정 정도로 공존하고 있다. 일반은혜와 특별은혜, 보편사와 구속사, 세 유형의 신학 등은 모두 개혁주의 안에서, 나아가 정통 기독교에서 균형을 이룰 때 온전한 신학의 역할을 할 수 있다는 것은 교회사가 증언한다. 같은 개혁주의 안에서 다른 명칭과 다른 명제로 나타난 것은 각각 당면한 ... This study examines the compatibility of two propositions that have emerged within Reformed theology: Neo-Calvinism’s “Theology is an academic discipline” and Reformed Life Theology’s “Theology is not an academic discipline.” The proposition “Theology is an academic discipline” implies a critique of the secularization of theology, the preservation of theology’s independence, and the emphasis on theology’s universality. On the other hand, the proposition “Theology is not an academic discipline” entails a critique of speculative theology, a call for the restoration of biblical theology, and an emphasis on theology that revitalizes the church. The compatibility of these two propositions was examined from the perspectives of common grace and special grace, universal history and redemptive history, and three types of theology. The results are as follows: The proposition “Theology is an academic discipline” began with the holy character of theology and shifted the emphasis toward theology’s position as an academically independent discipline. In contrast, the proposition ‘Theology is not an academic discipline’ emphasizes the essence of theology, which is centered on the Gospel of the Bible, while still acknowledging its academic nature. In other words, the two propositions share the commonality that the source of theology is the Bible, but they differ in that the former emphasizes the academic methodology of theology, while the latter emphasizes the biblical content, which is the essence of theology. In this sense, the former emphasizes the aspect of common grace, whereas the latter emphasizes the aspect of special grace. While the proposition “Theology is an academic discipline” presupposes theology for the church and emphasizes its academic nature on par with other disciplines, the proposition “Theology is not an academic discipline” presupposes theology’s academic nature but emphasizes its role in revitalizing the church. In this respect, the former focuses on theology within the universal historical realm, where Christians live alongside non-Christians, while the latter focuses on theology within the redemptive historical realm, composed of Christians in the church. Among both universal history and redemptive history, which apply to all Christians, Neo-Calvinism is evaluated as emphasizing the universal historical realm as a solution to contemporary issues, while Reformed Life Theology is seen as emphasizing the redemptive historical realm. The proposition “Theology is an academic discipline” critiques the secularization of theology, which arose due to the radical influence of the Alexandrian School, and re-establishes the church-centered theology of the Antiochian School, while also recovering and emphasizing moderate Alexandrian elements. On the other hand, the proposition “Theology is not an academic discipline” critiques theology’s speculative nature, which, under continued Alexandrian influence, led to the secularization of the church. It acknowledges the academic character of theology, a hallmark of the Alexandrian School, while emphasizing the biblical characteristics of the Antiochian School. The former strengthens Alexandrian characteristics on the foundation of the Antiochian School, while the latter recognizes Alexandrian characteristics but emphasizes the recovery of Antiochian elements. Thus, while Neo-Calvinism’s proposition “Theology is an academic discipline” emphasizes common grace, universal history, and moderate Alexandrian elements, Reformed Life Theology’s proposition “Theology is not an academic discipline” emphasizes special grace, redemptive history, and Antiochian elements. Church history testifies that theology can fulfill its complete role only when common grace and special grace, universal history and redemptive history, and the three types of theology are balanced, both within Reformed theology and broader orthodox Christianity....

한국선도의 지감·조식·금촉 수행 전통으로 바라본 ‘선교’의 제천수행

조채영 ( Cho¸ Chae Young ) 국제뇌교육종합대학원 국학연구원 2021 선도문화 Vol.31 No.-

Korean SunDo regarded the beginning of all the existences as ‘Ki’. And it had the world view that this phenomenal world had been made by movement of ‘Ki’. In order to have the world view of ‘Ki’, we have to be able to feel ‘Ki’, So in Korean SunDo, the discipline to feel ‘Ki’ was prior to the thought and valued very much. Therefore Korean SunDo’s discipline is called ‘Ki discipline’, on which Korean SunDo culture is based. SunDo scripture _SamIlShinGo_arranged Korean SunDo discipline as ‘JiGam·JoShik·GeumChok’. The most representative discipline of Korean SunDo is the heaven ritual. Lately the fact that the godhead of heaven ritual had been ‘Ki’ and its character had been discipline was revealed by relics and remains of HungShan Culture in Liaoxi area of China. SunGyo, a national religion also has the same world view with Korean SunDo, counting discipline a lot. The discipline of SunGyo is also ‘Ki’ discipline, and it follows JiGamㆍJoShikㆍGeumChok discipline of Korean SunDo tradition. Its representative discipline is the heaven ritual called ‘ChunJe(天祭)’, of which the godhead is ‘BulGwangHaNeuNim’. ‘BulGwangHaNeuNim’ manifests itself in 3 figures-BulGwangShinMyungㆍ BulGwangShinBulㆍBulGwangSunIn which respectively mean ‘Ki’ the real substance of being, the divinity that ‘Ki’ exists within humans and historical persons SunIn(仙人, SunDo master) who united the one and the other through discipline. That the divinity meaning an individual’s vitality is included shows the heaven ritual of SunGyo is the discipline for divine-human unity. Thus the character of ‘ChunJe(天祭)’ is discipline. The concrete discipline methods of SunGyo such as JeolSuHaeng(bowing discipline), BulGwangHwalBub, BulGwangSungEon are all ‘Ki’ disciplines for divine-human unity. So far the discipline of SunGyo can be accounted as that of modernized type of Korean SunDo inherited.