Post on 08-Apr-2023
1
Union Biblical Seminary, Pune
BD III, 2015
Subject: Person and Work of Jesus, the Christ
Emerging Christology from the margins
Topic: Feminist theology, Minjung Theology and Eco-theology
Instructor: Mr. David Muthukumar
Presented by: Akho, Maheigumlung, Promod and Tracie
Table of Content
Introduction
1. Feminist Christology
1.1. Re-visioning Christ
1.1.1. Feminist Re-evaluation of Christology
1.1.2. Jesus‟ Ministry of Inclusion
1.1.3. Feminine Images for Christ
1.1.4. Feminist views on Redemption
1.2. Towards a Feminist Christology within a body framework
1.2.1. Politicizing the body
1.2.2. Politicizing the skin (unpacking racism
1.2.3. Politicizing the blood
1.3. Wisdom Christology
1.3.1. Wisdom/Sophia as a mediator
1.3.2. Interpretation of Wisdom/Sophia
1.3.3. Wisdom/Sophia became incarnate
1.3.4. Perspective on Sophia/Wisdom in Contemporary Theology
2. Minjung theology (Christology).
2.1. Background of Minjung Theology
2.2. Jesus and the Minjung
2.3. Minjung Christology:
2.4. AhnByung Mu (1922 -1996)
2.4.1. Background
2.4.2. AhnByung Mu Mingjung-messianism
2.4.3. Critique of AhnByung-Mu-messianic: YimTaesoo
2.5. Suh Nam-Dong‟s Minjung-Messianism
3. What is Eco-Theology?
3.1. Relationship between Ecology and Theology
4. Cosmic Christology
4.1. Ecological Vision of Jesus
5. Eco-Theology from the Margins
5.1. Eco-Feminism
5.2. Subaltern Eco-Theology
5.2.1. Adivasi
5.2.2. Tribal
6. Towards Eco-justice
7. Application
8. Conclusion
Bibliography
2
Introduction: The main objective of theology from the margin is the realization of human dignity and liberation
from all types of oppressive structures. The commonality of these theologies is that they have taken the
experiences of alienation, nothingness, powerlessness, dread, fear and anxiety as the starting point for
constructing their theologies. The nature of Christ and his work have pave a way for theology from the margin in
stimulating liberation in every aspect.
This paper will discuss the emerging Christology from the margin dealing specially in relation with the feminist,
Minjung and eco- Christology.
1. Feminist Christology
Feminism was once self-centered, sexist, it turned partners into competitors, it denigrated the traditional virtues of
women; and it has become both the leading exponent of gender bias, and its most vocal critic. On the other hand,
they claim that they are attempting to redress a balance, and this seemingly innocent intention has led to a new
approach on their part towards Christianity, and consequently to Christology.1 Thus, feminist Christology makes
women‟s experiences the basis for Christological reflection. It challenges the centering of maleness as norms in
Christological discourse and overcoming binary opposition in Christian thought that lead to the other women. In
fact, it seeks to overcome patriarchy, also build new relationships between men and women by developing new
images of Jesus.2
1.1. Re-visioning Christ:
1.1.1. Feminist Re-evaluation of Christology Some feminists, seeing the historical development of Christological doctrineand how it has been used to oppress
women. Some female theologians, however, recognize that the message of Jesus is not one of submission and
dominance but one that calls all people (Jew or Greek, slave or free, male or female) to wholeness in Christ. For
these feminist liberation theologians, the problem is not so much Jesus as Christ but the way that Jesus as Christ
has been interpreted through the centuries.3 Therefore, they took as its task the development of a Christology that
is not detrimental to women.
However, it is important to note that the earliest Christological doctrines, those developed at the Council of Nicea
and the Council of Chalcedon, do not demand that Jesus' maleness be stressed. The Nicene confession stresses
that God became human (et homo factusest) not that God became man (et virfactusest). The Council of Chalcedon
made clear that Jesus was truly God and truly human (vere Deus, vere homo).4In fact, regardless of how the
maleness of Jesus has been interpreted and used to justify the domination of women, the classic doctrine of the
incarnation speaks of divinity and humanity of Christ, nothis maleness.5Hence the maleness of Jesus has nothing
to do with his ability to act as savior. Elizabeth Johnson argues that because the historical Jesus was a male in a
patriarchal society, his message is all the more striking.6 Likewise, in a patriarchal culture if a woman had
preached compassionate love and enacted a style of authority that serves, she would most certainly have been
greeted with a huge sign.
1.1.2. Jesus’ Ministry of Inclusion Elizabeth Johnson tells that Jesus‟ proclamation of the kingdom of God contains a vision of the just and
compassionate reign of God which is inclusive of all people.7 In her view this means that the hierarchies of
normal social order have been reversed. Entry into the kingdom is not based upon moral righteousness or social
and religious privilege, but the kingdom is for sinners, the lowly, the marginalized and the poor. Reuther takes
1 http://www.chogha.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/page226.html, viewed on 28th, Jan, 2015 at 3:45 pm 2 http://www.flashcardmachine.com/feminist-christology.html, viewed on 17th, Feb, 2015 at 2:45 pm 3 Jenifer Illig, Feminist Christology: remembering Jesus, re-envisioning Christ, Journal of Theta Alpha Kappa, 31 no 1 Spr 2007, 39. 4 Jenifer Illig, Feminist Christology, 40 5 Jenifer Illig, Feminist Christology, 40 6 Jenifer Illig, Feminist Christology, 40 7 http://www.chogha.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/page226.html, viewed on 28th, Jan, 2015 at 3:45 pm
3
this observation a step further by saying that Jesus‟ message of the kingdom contains an explicit rejection of all
hierarchical structures of dominion, especially patriarchy.8 Thus, the Reign of God, as envisioned by Jesus, is not
nationalistic or other-worldly, rather, it will come on this earth when structures of domination and subjection have
been overcome, when all dwell in harmony with God.9 Jesus understood that God loved all people, regardless of
gender, throughout his ministry, Jesus welcomed women, interact with them and later, spread the Gospel
message.On the other hand, the gospel also gives an account of a woman anointing Jesus before his death.
Therefore, if this is true, then it is women who act as the point of continuity between Jesus' ministry, death, burial,
and resurrection and the earliest beginnings of the Christian community.
1.1.3.Feminine Images for Christ One way of moving beyond an insistence on the importance of the maleness of Jesus is to use feminine images for
Christ. Anselm used the image in his writings, which stress that the mother is the one who loves the child and
would even die to give life to her child.10
In the medieval writings, the image of Christ as mother is used in three
different ways: Christ's death, which brought about redemption, is seen as a mother giving birth; Christ is
described as feeding the soul with his body and blood; Christ's love is related to the love a mother has for her
children.11
For Julian, the pain and shedding of blood associated with Christ's passion is paralleled to a woman in
labor.12
Hence, it is the suffering Christ who brings to completion the rebirth of humanity associated with the new
Adam. Moreover, Christ, as mother, is not just involved in the recreation of humanity; he nourishes those he has
recreated. Reuther points out that in the case of the medieval mystics, because Jesus' maleness was firmly
established in their minds, the female qualities they attribute to Christ are simply included in his maleness.13
She
explains, in Christ the male gains a mode of androgyny, of personhood that is both commanding and nurturing.
The female mystic gains the satisfaction of relation to a tender and mothering person.
1.1.4.Feminist views on Redemption Some post-Christian feminists, like Mary Daly, have suggested that, regardless of the life-giving qualities
associated with the mission of Jesus, the cross has become an instrument of torture for women because women
have so internalized the ethic of self-sacrifice and the rightfulness of being punished that they assume that their
rightful place is just there, on the cross with Jesus.14
In this regard, the death of Jesus is not demanded by God but
is rather, the action of humans who act against who preaches the equality of all. Thus, the friendship and inclusive
care of Sophia are rejected as Jesus is violently executed. In fact, seeing the death of Jesus in the context of his
life, feminist theology, with other forms of liberation theology, rejects Anselm of Canterbury's idea that Jesus'
death was necessary as repayment for sin because such an idea is tied to an image of God as wrathful and sadistic.
Indeed, Johnson argues that the cross reveals the opposite of such "male behavior".15
For feminists, the
understanding of the resurrection as a bodily phenomenon is significant because in the bodily resurrection of
Jesus, the feminist vision of wholeness, and of the value of the bodily integrity.As Reuther explains, redemption is
about the transformation of self and society into good, life-giving relations.16
Thus, for feminist theologians, the
redemptive process can begin only when relationships based on domination and submission have been eradicated.
1.2. Towards a Feminist Christology within a body framework
1.2.1. Politicizing the body
The body has its biological functions defined, not on color, shape or sexual orientation, but on an element of
common humanness that binds as one humanity. When any diseased or calamity or death strikes, it does not
8 http://www.chogha.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/page226.html, viewed on 28th, Jan, 2015 at 3:45 pm 9 Jenifer Illig, Feminist Christology, 35 10 Jenifer Illig, Feminist Christology, 40 11 Jenifer Illig, Feminist Christology, 41 12 Jenifer Illig, Feminist Christology, 42 13 Jenifer Illig, Feminist Christology, 42 14 Jenifer Illig, Feminist Christology, 43 15
Jenifer Illig, Feminist Christology, 44 16 Jenifer Illig, Feminist Christology , 45
4
matter in terms of skin or with any physical feature. The result is the same.17
However, it is not as simple as that
to say that we are all only physical bodies. We are constructed bodies in a particular culture with a sense of
identity. Culture defines what is a proper body, an improper body, what people can do in public, or in private,
what is appropriate to desire and what not. In other word, we are more than just a bunch of organs held within the
container of bones and flesh covered by the skin and a flow of blood in the regular veins.18
What is important is to
look into some of the aspects of the body that are essentially chosen for ascribing some myth and later interpret it
to be truth and thereby pave way for the perpetuation of barriers in the society.
1.2.2. Politicizing the skin (unpacking racism) When the biological are given differently, using different criteria and hierarchy of value, then there is a craving
for a black or a brown to bleach in order to achieve a higher status.19
When hierarchy is introduced to the color of
the skin and blackness is denounced in favor of the white, it is not just a matter of choice. It becomes a political
issue. It has material implications in terms of more access to resources, employment and other opportunities.
Meanwhile, Dalits are generally dark-skinned. Is this because of over exposure to the sun or that they are the
hardworking laboring class of people. If the politics of the skin is connected the ideology of racism, then we need
to depoliticize the skin. In fact, Jesus affirmed the faith and action of Samaritans who were of a different race than
the Jews who considered themselves as the elite race. The diseased bodies, untouchable bodies, the dead bodies
were not polluting for Jesus. He touched them, healed them and raised them from the dead.20
1.2.3. Politicizing the blood
Women and Dalit share a common experience of suffering under the ideology of purity and pollution and this has
to be repoliticized in order to recover the life-giving aspect of blood. Jesus affirms that blood as life. When the
woman who has bleeding for twelve long years (Mark 5) came to Jesus with faith, Jesus heals her, but not before
he teaches a lesson to the audience, especially the disciples. The hue and cry he makes by asking “who touched
me?” Jesus drew the attention of all to the fact that he was just touched by a haemorrhaging woman but that he
was not polluted. Neither does he tell the woman, now to go and offer the sacrifices that are required for
cleansing. Jesus instead admires her faith and gave her an identity of a daughter.21
Jesus never allowed the social
ideologies of caste/race/sex to construct his identity or limit the identity and potentiality of the other. Instead, he
constantly critiqued and rejected the system and structures that denied people of their human worth and identity.
1.2. Wisdom Christology
The Hebrew noun chokma חכמה also transliterated as hokhmah for "wisdom" occurs in the Masoretic text of
Hebrew Bible. Hokmah/Wisdom was known to Yeshua through the Books of Job, Proverbs and the Wisdom of
Solomon. In the book of Wisdom10:1-21, Hokmah/Wisdom and God's actions are the same.
Elizabeth A. Johnson states in her book “She Who Is” Hokmahwas as tool for the Jewish faith because they were
attracted by the Egyptian goddess Isis which was as creator of the universe and strives for suppression or
tyranny.22
The characteristics of Isis were ascribed to Yahweh's hokmah (wisdom) as female image. Further she
states by ascribing the functions of the goddess to Yahweh, and of Yahweh to the female Hokmah/Sophia Jewish
17 Evangeline Anderson-Rajkumar, “Politicising the Body: A Feminist Christology”, Asia Journal of Theology 18/1 (April 2004):100 18 Evangeline Anderson-Rajkumar, “Politicising the Body: A Feminist Christology”, Asia Journal of Theology 18/1
(April 2004):100 19 Evangeline Anderson-Rajkumar, “Politicising the Body: A Feminist Christology”, Asia Journal of Theology 18/1
(April 2004):101 20 Evangeline Anderson-Rajkumar, “Politicising the Body: A Feminist Christology”, Asia Journal of Theology 18/1 (April 2004):101 21 Evangeline Anderson-Rajkumar, “Politicising the Body: A Feminist Christology”, Asia Journal of Theology 18/1
(April 2004):102 22Harold Wells, “Trinitarian Feminism: Elizabeth Johnson's Wisdom Christology” in Theology Today, 52 no 3 (1995), 331.
5
were able to speak of the one God of Israel in female and male imagery as well.23
Johnson utilizes this approach
to locate the female face of God.
1.2.1. Wisdom / Sophia as a mediator
Wisdom described spirit pneuma, the attributes of spirit are intelligent, pure, and subtle (Wis7:22-23), the spirit
found in Sophia/wisdom is divine and all-powerful. Wisdom7:25-26 describes five metaphors for Wisdom, She is
a breath of the power of God (Wis7:25), a pure emanation of the glory of the Almighty (Wis7:25), a reflection of
eternal light, a spotless mirror of the working of God, and an image of his goodness (Wis7:26), all the images
convey an intimacy with God.24
Stoicism and Neo-Platonism were highly influence by the author of Wisdom.25
Rosemary Reuther insists that the Church father have used the concept of Logos to explain the incarnation, rather
they could have used the Jewish reflection upon wisdom. Julie M. Hopkins says in Jewish Hellenism and in the
Sapiental books of Hebrew Bible the “Hokmah” or “Sophia”, the Wisdom of God was divine mediator between
God and humanity.Hokmah” or Sophia is described as the female hypostasis of God who is the creative,
revelatory wisdom and justice of God.26
1.2.2. Interpretation of Wisdom / Sophia.
James Crenshaw said that, beyond the issue of gender nouns and a many opinions about whom female Wisdom
represents is the question of why Jewish writers talked about God in terms of personified Wisdom27
. Elizabeth
Johnson suggests that within the monotheistic context of Judaism, personified Wisdom was a way to preserve the
transcendence associated with Yahweh or God's activity in the world.28
Nancy J. Van Antwerp states in her
article, Sophia: The Wisdom of God, the precedent of personifying Wisdom as a female was well established
within Judaism by the time the book of Wisdom of Solomon was written.29
Latter Sophia/Wisdom faced challenge
in the form of the male Logos. Wisdom/Sophia came out of the Jewish wisdom tradition, where she was
recognizable personification of the divine and Logos came from Greek philosophy.30
In Philo‟s early works both
Sophia and Logos were similarly described but later his understanding of both personifications of God changed.
He replaced Sophia with Logos as a mediator between God and human beings. For him and for the Hellenistic
culture, females were imperfect and could not represent the supreme deity. His writings influenced John and the
development of later Christology in the church.31
1.2.3. Wisdom/Sophia became incarnate
Nancy J. Van Antwerp, states that the influence of the Jewish wisdom tradition is evident in early Christological
hymns of the New Testament found in the Epistles, Rom11:33; 1Cor1:24. This Wisdom Christology was the
earliest Christology which speaks of Christ as being pre-existent. Col-1:15, describes Jesus Christ as the image of
the invisible God, the first born of all creation, in Wisdom 7:26, where Sophia is praised for being the image of
the invisible God, the first born of all creation. The Christological hymns which associated Wisdom with Jesus
was written earlier than the gospel accounts of Jesus life.32
Elizabeth SchüsslerFiorenza argues that the earliest Christian theology was Sophialogy. Jesus was the prophet of
Sophia and the Q Sayings about Jesus, prophet of Sophia. The pre-existent male Logos is found in the Gospel of
John, 1:1-14, as a metaphor for Christ, which reflects the Philo writing and that writings testify to the inter
23Harold Wells, “Trinitarian Feminism: Elizabeth Johnson's Wisdom Christology”...332. 24 Nancy J. Van Antwerp, “Sophia: The Wisdom of God.” in Journal of Theta Alpha Kappa 31.1 (2007), 20. 25Nancy J. Van Antwerp, “Sophia: The Wisdom of God” ...22. 26Julie M. Hopkins, Towards a Feminist Christology (Grand Rapids: Michigan, 1995), 84. 27Nancy J. Van Antwerp, “Sophia: The Wisdom of God” ...22. 28Elizabeth A. Johnson, She Who Is: the Mystery of God in Feminist Theological Discourse (New York: Crossroad, 1993), 91. 29Nancy J. Van Antwerp, “Sophia: The Wisdom of God”... 23. 30 M. Gilbert, "Wisdom Literature, "in Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period, edited by Michael E. Stone (Philadelphia: Fortress Press,1984), 289 31 Elizabeth SchüsslerFiorenza, Jesus: Miriam„s Child, Sophia‟s Prophet (New York: Continuum,1994),137-139. 32 Nancy J. Van Antwerp, “Sophia: The Wisdom of God.” ...24.
6
changeability of Logos and Sophia/Wisdom in John. So according to Fiorenza, Sophia became flesh or incarnate
and dwelled among humanity.33
1.2.4. Perspectives on Sophia/Wisdom in Contemporary Theology
The concept of Sophia as God develops by 20th century feminist theologians. They rediscovered the Jewish
wisdom tradition and early Wisdom Christology of the early church and reconstructed new Christology that honor
Sophia and the divine feminine. The early church patriarchy chose Logos the male symbol for God over Sophia.34
Elizabeth Johnson suggests in her article “Holy Wisdom: Image of God's Saving Presence” that, the female
images for God help to prevent idolatry of male metaphors for God, validate the sacred value of femaleness and
connect with the experience of many women.35
R. Panikkar says, the word wisdom is etymologically related to
vidya, veda, means knowledge. Wisdom has a dwelling place in the human heart. Its leads to joy, happiness and to
a state of blessedness, which is the goal of human life. Wisdom is beautiful and more precious than the pearls. It
is a women‟s way.36
Nancy J. Van states, Christians need to educate about Sophia and the role of the Jewish
wisdom tradition played in the early church's developing understanding of Jesus as the Christ.37
2. Minjung theology (Christology).
2.1. Background:
Minjung theology is a Korean theology. “Minjung” is a term which grew out of the Christian experience in the
political struggle for justice over the last 30/40 years back. Minjung theology “is an articulation of the theological
reflections on the political experience of the Christian student, laborers, the press, professors, farmers, writers, and
intellectuals as well as the theologians in Korea in the 1970s”38
Mainjung theology is the result of the oppressive
nature of the political situation and a theological response to the oppressors and of the oppressed to the Korean
church and its mission. The word Minjung is a combination of two “Chinese characters, the „min‟ and „jung‟,
which can be translated as the people or the mass of people.” This Chinese words was then borrowed by the
Koreans; Chinese culture were quite similar to Korean culture.39
Who are these Minjung? Han Wan-Sang, a sociologist, in his book Minjung and society, she said Minjung are
those who are “oppressed politically, exploited economically, alienated sociologically. And kept culturally and
intellectually uneducated.”40
In other words Minjung are the living reality. According to Shu, the most important
element in the political consciousness of the minjujng which appear in the social biography of the oppressed
people of Korean is „han‟, most of the discussion and the issue were around this word and its meaning. “In term
of its etymology, it has a psychological word which denote the felling and suffering of a person which has been
repressed either by himself or through the oppression of others.”41
The feeling of han is a feeling of hopelessness,
it is a feeling of slaves in the face of their social fate experience the contradiction in society. When people realize
that they have been oppress by foreign powers, and their sense of national independence has to be repressed, the
felling of han rise up to the level of psycho-political anger, frustration and indignation. And the feeling of han, the
suffering and hopelessness of the oppressed, is an awareness of an individual or collective feeling in the collective
social biography of the oppressed Minjung of Korean.42
Han is the language of the Minjung and signifies the
33 Elizabeth SchüsslerFiorenza. Jesus: Miriam‟s Child, Sophia's Prophet..., 141. 34 Elizabeth SchüsslerFiorenza. Jesus: Miriam‟s Child, Sophia's Prophet.., 155,157. 35 Elizabeth A. Johnson, “Holy Wisdom: Image of God's Saving Presence,” in Living Pulpit 9, no. 3(July-Sep 2000),6. 36 Christina Manohar, Spirit Christology: An Indian Christian Perspective (Delhi: ISPCK, 2009), 247 37
Elizabeth A. Johnson, “Holy Wisdom: Image of God's Saving Presence,”...7 38. Suhkwang-Sun David, “A Biological Sketch of an Asian Theological Consultation,”Minjung Theology: people as the subject of History, ed. Commission on Theological Concerns of the Christian Conference of Asia, Maryknoll, N.Y: Orbis. 1983,18. 39. Andreas AnangguruYewangoe, Theological Cruces In Asia: Asian Christian Views On Suffering In The Face Of Overwhelming Poverty And Multifaceted Religiosity In Asia, (Netherlands: Amsterdam, 1987). 99 40. Hyun, “three Talks on Minjung theology,” Inter Religio 7 (spring, 1985), 4 41. Suhkwang-Sun David, A Biological Sketch of an Asian Theological Consultation, 19 42. Suhkwang-Sun David, A Biological Sketch of an Asian Theological Consultation, 19
7
reality of their experience, it enable to excess into the feelings and emotion of the Minjung. It not only the feeling
of defeat or nothingness, but rather it is a feeling of the tenacity of the will which come to the weaker beings.43
2.2. Jesus and the Minjung
For Minjung theologian, Jesus is truly part of the Minjung, Jesus was and is seen as the personification of the
Minjung, and their symbol. The relation between Minjung and Messiah must understood as a relation between the
Minjung as a subject and messiah as their function. The messianic function of the people is not in term of an elite
who sit at the top of a political hierarchy, but rather in terms of the suffering servent.44
“Jesus was a part of the
Minjung was clearly describe by Mark when he characterized the life style of Jesus as a friend of taxt-collector
and sinners; who taught like a man who had authority, who presented a montage of the criminal
Jesus.”45
AhnByung, said that Jesus always stood on the side of the oppressed, the aggrieved, and the weak. So
when Jesus said „he came not to call righteous, but sinner‟(Mark 2:17). He said that, it makes clear that Jesus
stood on the side of the Minjung (Minjung were consider as sinner by the elite and ruling group.)46
2.3. Minjung Christology:
In order to understand Minjung Christology we‟ll have to analysis the work of the two significance people,
AhnByung Mu and Suh Nam-dong, who had contributed to the development of Minjung theology. They are
consider as the fathers of the Minjung theology.
2.4. AhnByung Mu (1922 -1996):
2.4.1. Background:Minjung theology began with AhnByung Mu in the 1970s. He was the pioneer and is often
considered the "father" of Minjung theology. He was born in North Korea, he obtain his doctorate in the
1970‟s in NT from the university of Heidelberg.47
2.4.2. AhnByung Mu Mingjung-messianism:
Minjungmessianism is one of the representative of the Minjung theology. AhnByung Mu Minjung
Christology/messianism seem to be controversial and contradicting. Due to which it is gradually decreasing both
locally and internationally.48
AhnByung Mu in his writing stated that “Jesus is not the messiah”. He denied all the
traditional title designate to Jesus, such as „lord of redemption‟, „Messiah‟, „son of God‟, and „son of man‟. He
asserted that “Minjung are Messiah and Jesus is not messiah. His Minjung-messianism is based on John 1:29,
Matthew 25:31-43 and Hebrew 13:12-13.”49
a. The Lamb of God in Minjung (John 1:29)
The primary text of the Minjung-messianism of AhnByung Mu is john 1:29. “The logic
of his Minjungmessianism is that „the lamb of‟, who carries the sin of the world is the
Minjung.” And according to AhnByung Mu, “the sin of the world does not mean sin in
ethical religious sense, rather sin is a political and economical inconsistencies. According to
him Sin of the world mention in John1:29 refers to the political inconsistencies. We ought to
carry these political and economical inconsistencies burden;” and in reality it is Minjung
alone who carry these burdens and suffer instead of us. Therefore, the Minjung are “the Lamb
43. Andreas AnangguruYewangoe, Theological Cruces In Asia,110 44. Andreas AnangguruYewangoe, Theological Cruces In Asia, 126 45. Andreas AnangguruYewangoe, Theological Cruces In Asia, 136 46. Andreas AnangguruYewangoe, Theological Cruces In Asia, 136 47. Han Schwarz, Theology In A Global Context: The Last Two Hundred Years, (Michigan:Eerdmans, 2oo5), 517. 48. Yim, Taesoo, “Reflection on Minjung Theology: Messianism and a New Understanding of MinjungMessianism”, Dalit and Minlungtheologies:ADilogue, ed. Samson Prabhakar and Jinkwan Kwon, BTESSC/SATHRI, Bangalore, 2006, 135. 49. Yim, Taesoo, Reflection on Minjung Theology, 136.
8
of God who carry the sin of the world. He insisted that „the lamb of God ‟here does not mean
Jesus individual but rather the plural mass of the Minjung.”50
Which means, when the
Minjung are suffering and carrying the sin of the world. According to AhnByung Mu, it is the
Minjung who are carrying the burden of the world not Jesus.
b. The suffering Minjung are Messiah (Matt 25:31-46)
AhnByung-Mu asserted that the messianism of Christ is a continues process, which has
occour in the history of Jesus of Nazaret. According to him the Christ event occour not only
with Jesus of Nazaret, but it is a continues process, whichoccours in the history just like the
volcanoes eruption. AhnByung-Mu thinks that the event of Jesus does not have a unique and
once for all quality, which means this event of Jesus is not different from other Minjung event
in term of quality. He interpret Mathew 25:31-46 which says, “Christ exist among people
who are in prison, poorly clothed, starving, poor and captive.” For AhnByung, these people
are Minjung and therefore, Minjung are Christ.51
2.4.3. Critique of AhnByung-Mu-messianic: YimTaesoo
YimTaesoorebuttedAhnByung-Mu messianism, saying that “we cannot say these people are Christ
Himself. In the text, Christ is the Lord and judge in the Last Judgments; and the Minjung cannot become
Lord and Judge in the Last Judgments. ”52
According to Taesoo, text distinguish between the Lord and
the Minjung. “The aim of this parable is not for categorizing Christ and the least of his brother as the
same, but rather to say that we are to serve as Christ served. And by this it does not mean that Christ is
simply absorbed into his disciples or the least of his brothers. But the Christ here still act as Lord and
judge.”53
2.5. Suh Nam-Dong’s Minjung-Messianism
Even Suh Nam-Dong argued that the Minjung are Messiah, but he recognized Jesus as messiah, unlike
AhnByung-Mu. Shu‟sMessianism is different from AhnByung-Mu. In order to understand the difference
we need to examine the work of Shu.
a. Jesus is the messiah (christ)
According to suh, Jesus is God himself, and true man. He is the God who came to the poor, and the
oppressed. The purpose of God coming into this world; who became human being, is to serve people
wholly, not to be served by people.54
Shu expression of „theMinjung are Messian‟ does not mean that
the Minjung are everyonessavior and guide to the kingdom of God.” As mention above, for him, Jesus
is the true God, the incarnate God, the Christ, the Messiah and the lord of redemption, and Minjung
are none of the above. When Suh says the Minjung are messiah, he does not mean that the Minjung
and Jesus are ontologically identical.55
b. Minjung play the role of Messiah
In order to distinguish jesus-messianism from Minjung- messianism, Shu, prefer to used, “the
Messianic function of the Minjung,” or “the Messiah role of Minjung” rather than “the Minjung is
messiah.” By doing this Suh, want to indicate that Minjung does not have divine power to redeem
other people, but they just fulfill the role of messiah. Minjung can play the role of messiah not
because the Minjung have any supernatural divine power, but because paradoxically the Minjung are
the weak, and the people who suffer. To make it more clearSuh, explain the role of Messianic role of
Minjung in the parable of the last judgment in Matt25. He argues that, serving the people who are
50. Ahn, Byung-Mu, A Story on Minjung Theology, Korea Theological Study Institute, 1987, 96. 51. Yim, Taesoo, Reflection on Minjung Theology, 138. 52. Yim, Taesoo, Reflection on Minjung Theology, 138 53. Yim, Taesoo, Reflection on Minjung Theology,138. 54. Suh, Nam-Dong, A Study on Minjung Theology, Han-gil-sa, 54. www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/ijt/33-4_001.pdf 55. Yim, Taesoo, Reflection on Minjung Theology, 142.
9
hungry, thirsty and sick is served to Jesus. And on contrary we should not misunderstood Minjung as
messiah.56
That‟s how he implicit Minjung playing the role of Messiah.
3. What is Eco-Theology?
Nelson Bock defines Eco-theology as “an articulation of the intrinsic relationship between one‟s
theology and one‟s ecological perspective”.57
According to Lawrence Troster, Eco-theology is the
integration of the new scientific perspective on the natural world with traditional theological concepts,
producing a new theological paradigm.58
Eco-theology can first begin through the new scientific
perspectives of the natural world that has vastly developed over the centuries. The knowledge of
cosmology, biology, genetics, ecology and evolution are indispensible factors towards understanding our
human relationship with the natural world.59
It has also been greatly influenced by Eco-feminism. There
are three methods propounded by Mary Evelyn Tucker to transform traditional religious beliefs:60
a. Retrieval: retrieving the old neglected material within the traditional sources which may speak
or enlighten the modern eco-theological readings.
b. Re-interpretation: It reinterprets traditional texts, liturgy and rituals from the view of ecological
context.
c. Reconstruction: It tries to reconstruct the radical beliefs of any traditional theology and suit it
more to a planetary or universalistic expression.
3.1. Relationship between Ecology and Theology61
As defined earlier, the discipline of theology and ecology are intrinsically related. Both the
discipline tries to portray the expression of human desire to know the truth about the source and meaning
of their existence on this planet. One of its main objectives is to comprehend this truth through different
starting points and methods. Hence theology begins with the study of the idea of God and ecology
through the study and observance of nature. Meanwhile, it is also possible to understand God through the
observance of nature and likewise form an outlook on nature through forming an idea about God.
4. Cosmic Christology
The starting point of the doctrine of cosmic Christology is the doctrine of creation, which
includes the features of the existence of the cosmos and the existence of human beings. Through Jesus,
the Second Person in Trinity, the theology of cosmic Christ is established. He is seen as the origin and
end of Creation. “The image of the unseen God and the firstborn of all creation, for in Him were created
all things in heaven and on earth: everything visible and everything invisible….all things were created
through Him and for Him” (Col. 1:15-16). The idea of Cosmic Christology denotes the love of God for
humankind and to perfect the creation. The perfection of creation suggests the Creator-Creature
relationship.62
The Cosmic Christology also denotes truth, goodness and beauty of creation in Jesus Christ. The
Incarnation, Redemption and Eschatology are related to creation and stresses upon that the human
experience of interaction with their environment must be like that of Christ. Incarnation plays a very
important in the interaction between God and Creation. The Eschatological aspect of Christology quests
for the fulfillment of all things in Christ and to portray the final destiny of all things that are in the hands
of God.63
4.1. Ecological Vision of Jesus
56. Suh, Nam-Dong, A Study on Minjung Theology, Han-gil-sa, 7 57. Nelson Bock, “An Eco-theology: Towards Spirituality of Creation and Eco-justice”, in Cross Currents, 63 no 4 D 2013, p 433-446. 58. Lawrence Troster, “What is Eco-theology?”, in Cross Currents, 63 no 4 D 2013, p 380-385. 59. Lawrence Troster, “What is Eco-theology?”, in Cross Currents, 63 no 4 D 2013, p 380-385. 60. Lawrence Troster, “What is Eco-theology?”, in Cross Currents, 63 no 4 D 2013, p 380-385. 61. Nelson Bock, “An Eco-theology: Towards Spirituality of Creation and Eco-justice”, in Cross Currents, 63 no 4 D 2013, p 433-446. 62Nwaigbo, Ferdinand, Cosmic Christology and Eco-theology, In Africa, AFER, 53 no 2 Je 2011, p 437-461. 63. Nwaigbo, Ferdinand, Cosmic Christology and Eco-theology, 437
10
In the life and teachings of Jesus, we see him travelling through the countryside and involving
himself with the people who are deprived and ostracized. These people usually earn their livelihood
through the abundance of nature; this made Jesus to understand the significant role of nature in their lives.
Further, it enabled Jesus to use the metaphors of agricultural activities and proclaim the kingdom of God
in parables containing nature and its works. The parables on the other-hand articulated the ecological
vision of Jesus. It consists of two characteristics: agricultural process as a divine activity that demands
human co-operation with nature and the need to end the oppressive social practices that adversely affects
the sanctity and order of the nature.64
5. Eco-Theology from the Margins
5.1. Eco-Feminism
Eco-feminism is diverse in its approach and perspective. It consists of several dimensions in
making its voices heard: activism, social movements, academia and religion. However, one common
message it tries to portray is the significant relationship between women and the natural world.65
One of
its basic goals is to counter act against the dominion of the ecological resources by the people in power,
and also to fight against the domination of men on women, where both of these domination are
interrelated in nature.
Eco-feminism tries to relate their experiences towards nature with that of how God cares for the
nation. It uses metaphors found in the bible passages to convey their association with God. Their visions
does not limit only towards liberating women from the clutches of the dominant ruling classes exploiting
both women and nature, but also to address the issues in a holistic manner where a new way of
understanding life and sustaining earth will be achieved.66
5.2. Subaltern Eco-Theology
5.2.1. Adivasi
The Adivasis or Aboriginal people have been traditionally dependent upon the land and the sea
for their survival- farmers, fisher-folks, agriculturalists etc.67
They live in close proximity to the earth; in a
caring relationship with the earth.68
Their livelihood is based on shifting and jhum cultivation,
horticulture, animal husbandry and collection and sale of forests products and resources. For them, the
land is not just for their economic assistance with material significance, but of great cultural and spiritual
significance.69
However, with the coming of modernization and industrialization, many of these groups
have been exploited and displaced from their own inhabited land. The land is their Goddess; their religion
and their convictions are to save the hill because it gives them everything they need.70
5.2.2. Tribal
Creation is viewed as the essence and central point of reference and norm. It is the key to
understand all realities in the tribal world; Humanity, the Supreme Being and the Spirit or spirits are
approached from the perspective of creation.71
Land resources are the primary source of their living and
they take pride in accumulating land which they consider it as one of their greatest assets of wealth. The
Land is sacred, it is the people‟s identity, creates community and it signifies the inseparable relationship
64. V.J. John, The Ecological Vision of Jesus(Bangalore: CSS, 2002), 236. 65. Heather Eaton, Introducing Eco-feminist Theologies (London: T&T Clark International, 2005), 12. 66. ArunaGnanadason, “Women, Patriarchy and Creation: Insight from Eco-Feminism”, The Journal of Theologies and Cultures in Asia Vol. 11 (Kolkata: PTCA, 2012), 58-73. 67.K.C. Abraham, “Liberation: Human and Cosmic”, in Ecology and Development edited by Daniel D. Chetti (Madras: GURUKUL, 1991), 75-78. 68. Gnanadason, Aruna, “The Integrity of Creation and Earth Community: An Ecumenical Response to Environmental Racism,” Union Seminary Quarterly Review, 58 no 1-2 2004, p 97-119. 69. http://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1030&context=internationaleducation... Accessed on 10:45AM 8th Feb. 2014. 70. Gnanadason, Aruna, Racism,” Union Seminary Quarterly Review, 58 no 1-2 2004, p 97-119. 71. A. WatiLongchar, “A Critique of The Christian Theology of Creation,” in Doing Theology with Tribal Resources, edited by A. WatiLongchar and Larry E. Davis (Jorhat: TSC, 1999), 60-76.
11
between the Creator and the Creatures.72
People are highly discouraged to sell their land to others,
because it is their inheritance and the identity of their fore-fathers, as well as the family and community‟s
pride. Meanwhile, for Tribals, Harmony with the Creation is the beginning of their spirituality.
Commitment and Dedication to acquire harmony with the Creation is brought out through love, nurture,
care and acceptance.73
Hence, in loving and caring for the Creation a person can develop harmonious
relationship with the people that surround him. It is the basis for developing peace, morality, norm and
valued traditional practices of a person as well as the community.
6. Towards Eco-justice:
The concept of Justice and Righteousness cannot be separated from one another. Both pertains to
having right relationships i.e., a relationship congruent with the truth. Hence, justice cannot exist without
righteousness. Therefore, eco-theology gives emphasis on the concepts of justice and righteousness and to
extent it to include right relationship with creation.74
Sallie McFague states, “We can no longer see ourselves as rulers over nature but must think of
ourselves as gardeners, caretakers, mother and fathers, stewards, trustees, lovers, priests, co-creators and
friends of a world that while giving us life and sustenance, also depends increasingly on us in order to
continue both for itself and for us.”75
Meanwhile, Vandana Shiva states, “The growth of the market
cannot solve the very crisis it creates….while natural resources can be converted into cash, cash cannot be
converted into nature‟s ecological process…. In nature‟s economy, the currency is not money, it is life.”76
The development and market economies should therefore regard nature‟s economy as primary instead of
treating it as the secondary. In-order to resolve the ecological crisis and preserve the fertility of nature, the
market economies should give nature‟s economy its due place in sustainable foundation of a healthy
nature.77
Further, one ecumenical leader put it: “The church, together with other living faiths, should seek
a global ethics based on shared ethical values that transcend religious beliefs and narrow definitions of
national interests... In a world where technological culture and globalization foster dehumanization… The
church, in collaboration with other faiths, is called to reshape, renew and re-orient society by
strengthening its sacred foundation. In the pluralist societies of today we have a shared responsibility with
our neighbors for a common future... Any process or development that jeopardizes the sustainability of
creation must be questioned. Humanity must restore right relations with the creation.”78
Calvin B. Dewitt brings out four principles regarding safeguarding the ecology, which are
discerned through Biblical narratives:79
(a). The „Earth-keeping principle‟: Just as the creator keeps and sustains humanity, so humanity
must keep and sustain the Creator‟s creation.
(b). The „Sabbath principle‟: The creation must be allowed to recover from human use of its
resources.
(c). The „Fruitfulness-principle‟: The fecundity of the creation is to be enjoyed, not destroyed.
(d). The „Fulfillment and Limits Principle‟: There are limits set to humanity‟s role within
creation, with boundaries set in place which must be respected.
K.C. Abraham also emphasizes on four aspect of how to maintain and sustain the wholeness of
creation. They are:80
72. A. WatiLongchar, “Dancing With the Land: Significance of Land for Doing Tribal Theology”, in Doing Theology with Tribal Resources, edited by A. WatiLongchar and Larry E. Davis (Jorhat: TSC, 1999), 117-126. 73. A. WatiLongchar, “A Critique of The Christian Theology of Creation,” In Doing Theology with Tribal Resources… p60-76. 74. Nelson Bock, “An Eco-theology: Towards Spirituality of Creation and Eco-justice”, in Cross Currents, 63 no 4 D 2013, p 433-446. 75. K.C. Abraham, “A Theological Response to the Ecological Crisis,” in Eco-Theology, edited by David G. Hallman…65-78. 76. Vandana Shiva, Ecology and the Politics of Survival, (New Delhi: Sage Publications, 1991), 342. 77. Vandana Shiva, Ecology and the Politics of Survival…, 343. 78.https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCcQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.earthcharterinaction.org%2Finvent%2Fimages%2Fuploads%2FHessel%2520Ecumenical%2520Christianity%2520and%2520the%2520Earth%2520Charter.pdf&ei=xPj1UuaDJY6Nrge8oYCYCw&usg=AFQjCNHdOjxJVKblIl_Vvp1PU5_GjexFsw&bvm=bv.60983673,d.bmk…Accessed on 8th Feb. 2014 21:25PM. 79.Alister E. Mcgrath, “The Stewardship of the Creation: An Evangelical Affirmation”, in Care for Creation, edited by R.J. Berry…86-89.
12
(a). Conservation, not consumerism;
(b). Need, not greed;
(c). Enabling power, not dominating power;
(d). Integrity of creation, not exploitation of nature.
Ecological movements are mostly non-violent in nature. They maybe small and insignificant at
the moment but they are growing. These movements are mostly local but their success lies in the hand of the non-
locals. Their demand is merely the right to survival along with the least demand of the right to live in a peaceful
and just world. Hence, unless the world is “restructured ecologically” in congruence with the world-views and
life-styles, the peace and justice will continue to be at threat and the survival of humanity threatened.81
7. Conclusion:
The above emerging theologies as discussed see the humaneness of Christ to relate to their pathos, sufferings
and eventually to liberate themselves from the clutches of the oppressive dominant class and factors. The
Feminist Christology tries to re-imagine and re-interpret the teachings of Christ into their context so as to find
a way out of the oppression and find hope in their quest for equality. The Minjung theology views Jesus as
their liberator from the political, economic and social struggles. It also interprets the bible to relate it to their
contexts and plights they are under-going. The Eco-Theology mainly focuses on redeeming the Creation and
bringing Justice to the environments where it is been rampantly destroyed through human activities. It sees
Christ as the first born of all creation and humankind has the obligation to preserve and protect the
environment at all cost. Hence, all these theologies put Christ at the center, so as to relate to their pathos and
quest for liberation in the Person of Christ, His teachings and Works.
Hence, the above discussion, indicated the importantof doing theology from the margins. Without
identifying Jesus with the real life situation and struggle of people; Christ work would have been
worthless/meaningless. But because of its relevant-ness to all the context and situation Christ and his work
has liberated, and still liberating and will continue to liberate. Because of its “relevant-ness-nature” it has
become more valuable and meaningful.
Bibliography:
Abraham, K.C. “Liberation: Human and Cosmic”. In Ecology and Development. Edited by Daniel D. Chetti.
Madras: GURUKUL, 1991.
Christina, ManoharSpirit Christology: An Indian Christian Perspective . Delhi: ISPCK, 2009.
John, V.J. The Ecological Vision of Jesus. Bangalore: CSS, 2002.
Longchar, A. Wati. “Dancing With the Land: Significance of Land for Doing Tribal Theology”. In Doing
Theology with Tribal Resources. Edited by A. WatiLongchar and Larry E. Davis. Jorhat: TSC, 1999.
Longchar, Wati. “A Critique of The Christian Theology of Creation.” In Doing Theology with Tribal Resources.
Edited by A. WatiLongchar and Larry E. Davis. Jorhat: TSC, 1999.
Mcgrath, Alister E. “The Stewardship of the Creation: An Evangelical Affirmation”. In Care for Creation. Edited
by R.J. Berry. Leicester: Inter-Varsity, 2000.
Nwaigbo, Ferdinand. “Cosmic Christology and Eco-Theology in Africa.” In AFER, 53 no 2 Je 2011, p 437-461.
Fiorenza, Elizabeth Schüssler. Jesus: Miriam 's Child ,Sophia's Prophet. New York: Continuum, 1994.
Gnanadason, Aruna. “Women, Economy and Ecology”. In Eco-Theology: Voices From South and North. Edited
by David G. Hallman. Geneva: WCC, 1995.
Johnson, Elizabeth A. She Who Is: the Mystery of God in Feminist Theological Discourse. New York: Crossroad,
1993.
Hopkins, Julie, M.Towards a Feminist Christology Grand Rapids: Michigan, 1995.
80. K.C. Abraham, “A Theological Response to the Ecological Crisis,” in Eco-Theology, edited by David G. Hallman (Geneva: WCC, 1995), 65-78. 81. Vandana Shiva, Ecology and the Politics of Survival…, 350.
13
Julie, M. Hopkins, Towards a Feminist Christology Grand Rapids: Michigan, 1995
Karkkainen ,Veli-Matti. Pneumatology .Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002.
Karkkainen, Veli-Matti. Christology : A Golbalintroducation .Grand Rapids: Barker Academic,2003
M. Gilbert, "Wisdom Literature, "in Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period, ed. Michael E. Stone
.Philadelphia: Fortress Press,1984.
Karkkainen ,Veli-Matti. Pneumatology .Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002)
Karkkainen, Veli-Matti. Christology: A Golbalintroducation .Grand Rapids: Barker Academic,2003
Gilbert, M."Wisdom Literature" in Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period, ed. Michael E. Stone
.Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984.
Suhkwang-Sun David. “A Biological Sketch of an Asian Theological Consultation,”Minjung Theology: people as
the subject of History, ed. Commission on Theological Concerns of the Christian Conference of Asia, Maryknoll,
N.Y: Orbis. 1983.
Schwarz, Han. Theology In A Global Context: The Last Two Hundred Years. Michigan:Eerdmans, 2oo5.
Taesoo, Yim. Reflection on Minjung Theology: Messianism and a New Understanding of MinjungMessianism,
Dalit and Minlungtheologies:ADilogue, ed. Samson Prabhakar and Jinkwan Kwon, BTESSC/SATHRI,
Bangalore, 2006, 135.
Vangerud , Nancy Victorin-. The Raging Hearth: Spirit in the Household of God. St Louis Missouri, Chalice
Press, 2000.
Yewangoe, Andreas Anangguru. Theological Cruces In Asia: Asian Christian Views On Suffering In The Face Of
Overwhelming Poverty And Multifaceted Religiosity In Asia. Netherlands: Amsterdam, 1987.
Articles
Ahn, Byung-Mu, A Story on Minjung Theology, “Korea Theological Study Institute”.1987. 96.
Bergin, Helen."Feminist Pneumatology." Colloquium 42.2 (2010): 188-207.
Bobrinskoy, Boris. "The Indwelling of The Spirit In Christ: "Pneumatic Christology" In The Cappadocian
Fathers." St Vladimir's Theological Quarterly 28.1 (1984), 49
Bock, Nelson. “An Eco-Theology: Towards a Spirituality of Creation and Eco-Justice.” In Cross Currents, 63 no
4 D 2013, p 433-446.
Christina Manohar, Spirit Christology: An Indian Christian Perspective . Delhi: ISPCK, 2009.
Eaton, Heather. Introducing Eco-feminist Theologies. London: T&T Clark International, 2005.
Elizabeth A.Johnson, "Holy Wisdom: Image of God's Saving Presence, "Living Pulpit 9, no.3 July-September
2000.
Elizabeth SchüsslerFiorenza, Jesus: Miriam 's Child ,Sophia's Prophet. New York: Continuum, 1994
Elizabeth A. Johnson, She Who Is: the Mystery of God in Feminist Theological Discourse. New York: Crossroad,
1993.
Gnanadason, Aruna. “Women, Patriarchy and Creation: Insight from Eco-Feminism”. In The Journal of
Theologies and Cultures in Asia Vol. 11 (Kolkata: PTCA, 2012), 58-73.
Hyun, “three Talks on Minjung theology,” Inter Religio 7 (spring, 1985),
Helen Bergin, Feminist Voices on the Spirit of God. http://wsrt.asn.au/web_images/bergin.pdf 14/1/15. 3.15pm.
Illig, Jenifer. Feminist Christology: remembering Jesus, re-envisioning Christ, Journal of Theta Alpha Kappa, 31
no 1 Spr 2007, p 33-51.
Mercy T. Rani, “The Theology of the Holy Spirit as Mother”, National council of Church in India, Vol 130/6,
June, 2010, 44.
Nancy Victorin-Vangerud, The Raging Hearth: Spirit in the Household of God. St Louis,Missouri, Chalice Press,
2000.
Rajkumar, Evangeline Anderson. “Politicising the Body: A Feminist Christology”, In Asia Journal of Theology
18/1(April 2004).
14
Sudaanand, Sumira and Hrangkhuma, f.,eds.Doing Mission in Context . Bangalore: Theological Book trust, 1950,
Bergin, Helen."Feminist Pneumatology." Colloquium 42.2 (2010): 188-207.
Van Antwerp, Nancy, Sophia: the wisdom of God. Source: Journal of Theta Alpha Kappa, 31 no 1 Spt 2007, p
19-32.
Webliography:
http://www.chogha.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/page226.html, viewed on 28th, Jan, 2015 at 3:45 pm
http://www.flashcardmachine.com/feminist-christology.html, viewed on 17th, Feb, 2015 at 2:45 pm
http://www.chogha.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/page226.html, viewed on 28th, Jan, 2015 at 3:45 pm