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