호주선교사와 영등포산업선교회

영등포산업선교회와 호주 교회

인 명 진

(전 영등포산업선교회 총무)

1. 영등포산업선교의 시작

   영등포산업선교회는 1958년 한국 최초로 세워진 노동자 선교기관이다. 참으로 놀라운 사실은 한국 내에서 비교적 보수교단이라 일컬어지는 대한예수교(통합)에서 노동자들에 대한 선교를 소위 진보적 교단이라는 다른 교단에 앞서 처음 시작됐다는 것이다. 사실 사회선교는 한국 기독교장로회(기장), 감리교의 대명사처럼 되어졌는데 말이다. 사실 70-80년대 세계교회에 널리 알려졌고 한국의 민주화 운동이나 노동운동 역사의 중심에 있었던 산업선교가 일반 사람이나 세계교회에 알려진 대로 기장이나 감리교에 의해서 주도된 것이 아니다. 사람들이 전혀 기대도, 짐작도 하지 못한 보수적인 예장소속인 영등포산업선교에 의해 이루어졌다는 사실은 이제쯤은 바로 잡혀야 할 역사적 사실이다. 이는 무슨 교단주의나 주도권 다툼이 아니다. 사실을 사실대로 역사에 기록되어야 한다는 당위성 때문이다. 시작된 역사가 그렇고 그 활동의 내용에 있어서 그렇다.

영등포산업선교는 1958년 대한예수교장로회 경기노회에 의해 시작되었다. 이보다 앞서 예장총회는 총회의 결의로 1957년 총회전도부 안에 산업선교 중앙위원회를 설치하고 산업선교를 추진해 오던 중, 당시 가장 공장이 밀집해 있던 영등포 지역 관할노회인 경기노회가 이 일을 시작하게 되었다. 물론 우리 총회가 이렇게 하기까지에는 당시 EACC (East Asia Christian Council)의 산업선교 담당총무이었던 미국장로교 선교사 헨리 존스 목사의 강력한 권고가 있었고, 우리 총회 지도자들의 ‘고기가 많은 곳에 그물을 던져야 한다’는 복음전도의 열정과 전략에 기인한다 하겠다.

그러므로 초기 산업선교는 그 이름 ‘산업전도(Industrial Evangelism)에서 보는 대로 사람들이 많이 모여 있는 공장에 있는 노동자들을 전도하는 일이었다. 영등포에 산업선교회는 당시 경기노회 안에 있던 교회지도자들인 방지일 목사, 계효원 목사, 유병관 목사, 이정학 목사 등에 의해 지원을 받아 시작되었고 강경구 전도사(여)가 초기 실무자로 일하게 되었다.

강경구 전도사는 노회의 지도자들이 바라는 바대로 공장근로자들을 전도하는 일에 힘써 왔다. 물론 그 때의 활동영역에는 이미 크리스찬으로서 공장에 다니는 노동자들을 모아 친교를 나누며 그들의 신앙생활을 돕는 것도 포함되었다. 그런데 이와 같은 영등포산업선교의 활동은 1964년 산업선교의 전문적인 훈련을 받은 조지송 목사가 경기노회에서 한국교회 역사상 최초로 ‘산업선교목사’로 안수를 받고 영등포산업선교회에서 그의 사역을 시작한 몇 년 이내에 큰 변화가 일어나게 되었다. 그 변화는 공장 노동자들을 전도하여 예수를 믿게 하려던 초기의 목적에서 벗어나 노동자들의 인권문제, 공장 안의 노동조건 문제 등을 선교의 과제로 삼게 된 것이다.

물론 이 같은 변화는 시대적인 변화, 본격적인 산업화에 따른 이전에 보지 못했던 복잡한 노동문제의 발생, 산업선교에 대한 노동자들의 현실적인 요구, 그리고 새로운 선교신학(예: 평신도신학, 하나님선교-MISSIONDEI)의 자극 등에 의한 것이었다. 물론 이와 같은 영등포산업선교회의 노선 변화는 보수적 교회지도자들을 당황하게 했을 뿐 아니라 70,80년대에 절정에 이르는 교회와 산업선교회와의 긴장 내지는 갈등, 대립으로 이어지게 되었다.

 2. 호주교회와 영등포산업선교와의 관계의 시작

참으로 흥미로운 일은 영등포산업선교회의 역사를 보면 아주 초기를 제외하고는 외국교회와의 긴밀한 협력 속에 진행되었는데 그 직접적인 협력관계가 호주교회- 처음에는 호주장로교, 후에는 호주연합교회(Uniting Church of Australia)와 이루어졌다는 사실이다. 영등포산업선교회에 처음 온 선교사로 호주선교사 Dick Wooten 이었고 그 이후 연이어 무려 7명의 호주교회 파송선교사가 연이어서 영등포산업선교회에 와서 함께 동역하였다. 그 기간이 또한 수십년에 이른다. 그리고 이 같은 예는 한국 내에 있는 그 어떤 선교기관에서도 찾아볼 수 없는 특이한 일이다.

결국 결론적으로 말할 수 있는 것은 참으로 영등포산업선교가 공헌한 한국의 교회 역사에서뿐 아니라 노동운동역사, 민주화 운동역사, 인권운동역사는 호주교회와의 협력 속에서 이룩한 성과이었고, 그러므로 한국의 현대사와 한국교회 속에서 영등포산업선교의 공헌이었다고 한다면 그 공은 마땅히 호주교회와 함께 나누어야 할 것이다.

3. 영등포 산업선교회의 첫번째 선교사 우택인 목사(Richard Frank Wooten, 1964-1969)

우택인 목사는 호주 장로교 파송선교사로서 1964년 7월 한국에 와서 한국어를 익힌 다음 영등포산업선교회에 와서 조지송목사와 협력하여 그의 선교사역을 시작하였다. 우택인 목사는 호주에서 면허를 가진 배관기술자였고 난방, 용접, 에어컨디션 설비의 전문가였고, 목사가 되기 전, 그 방면에서 일을 한 노동자로서의 경험이 있었기에 그가 한국에서 노동자선교를 위해 영등포산업선교에 온 것은 너무도 당연한 일이었다. 우택인 목사가 영등포산업선교회에서 한 일은 홍콩산업선교회(CIC), 일본산업선교회와 필리핀과 다른 아시아 국가들의 산업선교조직들과 연대를 맺고 그들과 영등포산업선교회간의 교류를 증진하는 일이었다. 우택인 목사는 영등포에서의 5년 남짓한 선교협력사역을 마치고 1969년 호주로 귀국하였는데 그는 호주에 귀국한 이후 오히려 한국의 노동자선교, 인권선교, 민주화운동을 위해 더 많은 일을 하였다. 즉, 그는 호주장로교총회(후에 호주연합교회) 세계선교위원회의 인권총무로서 그리고 아시아기독교교회협의회(CCA)와 세계교회협의회의 국제관계위원회(WCC-CCIA)의 위원으로서 한국의 인권과 민주화를 위한 투쟁을 강력히 지원하여 큰 업적을 남겼다. 뿐만 아니라 남북의 평화문제에도 깊은 관심을 가지고 북한을 여러 번 방문하여 남북교회간의 교류와 북한 그리스도연맹과 세계교회와의 관계를 증진하는 일에 큰 기여를 하였다. 우택인 목사는 결국 한국에 있었을 때 보다 한국을 떠났을 때 더 많이 한국을 위해 일했으며 영등포산업선교회에서 일한 기간보다 훨씬 더 오랜 세월 동안 영등포산업선교회의 동역자로서 더 많이 헌신하였다. 그래서 우택인 목사는 영등포산업선교회의 영원한 선교동역자로 살아온 사람이다.

 4. 인명진 목사와 호주교회

자신의 이야기를 기록하는 회고록도 아닌 공적인 글 중에 자신의 이야기를 쓰는 것은 객관적이지 않을 수 있다. 그러나 자신이 경험하고 알고 있는 사실을 사실대로 기록하는 것은 후대에 역사를 연구하며 기록하려는 사람들을 위해 좋은 자료가 되는 것으로서 꼭 필요한 일일 것이다. 필자는 사람들에게 잘 알려지지 않은 필자와 호주교회와의 사실적 관계를 기록하여 영등포산업선교회 역사의 한 부분으로 남기고자 한다.

필자가 영등포산업선교회에서 일한 것은 산업선교훈련을 시작한 1972년 4월부터 그곳을 떠난 1984년 4월까지 만 13년이다. 이 때는 영등포산업선교회의 40여년 역사가운데 가장 주목할 만한 시기이었다. 수많은 노동자투쟁이 영등포산업선교회를 중심으로 일어났고, 그래서 한국의 노동운동, 인권운동, 민주화운동에 영등포산업선교회가 구심적인 역할을 담당하던 시기였다. 그만큼 정부의 탄압도 심했으며, 필자는 4차례 3년여의 감옥생활을 했으며, 다른 산업선교실무자들도 체포,조사, 구금 등의 탄압을 받았던 시기이었다. 그래서 영등포산업선교회는 세계교회의 주목을 받았고, 기도의 대상이 되었다. 한편 영등포산업선교회는 그 역사상 한국교회와 가장 갈등과 대립관계에 있었다. 노회의 비우호적인 태도와 때로는 억압단계까지 이르러 그 동안 이어져 온 한국교회로부터의 재정적 지원중단, 심지어는 군사정부의 중앙정보부로부터 압력을 받은 총회로부터 탄압과 산업선교폐지의 위기, 교회 안팎의 산업선교 반대자들의 반 산업선교운동과 산업선교 비난과 흑색선전의 책자, 방송, 신문의 왜곡보도 등 산업선교의 암흑의 시기이었다.

그리함에도 산업선교는 그 역사상 노동자들의 가장 많은 신뢰와 가장 강력한 연대를 이룬 자랑스런 역사를 가진 때도 그 때이다.  필자는 바로 이 때 영등포산업선교의 실무자와 총무로 일하였다. 그 때 필자는 조지송, 명노선, 신철영, 송진섭 등 훌륭하고 헌신적인 동역자들과 함께 일할 수 있었음을 지금도 자랑으로 생각한다. 필자가 산업선교에서 일하게 된 것은 전적으로 당시 호주선교사로서 장로교신학대학에서 구약학 교수로 있던 변조은목사(John P Brown)의 권고와 주선으로 이루어졌다.

필자가 신학교3학년 졸업반이었을 때 앞으로의 진로를 고민할 때, 변조은 목사는 교회목회로 가는 것보다 외국유학이던지, 산업선교로 가는 것이 어떻겠느냐는 권고를 했고 필자는 산업선교를 하기로 결정했다. 물론 필자가 산업선교를 선택한 것은 당시 누구의 권유 때문만이 아니라 가난한 이들을 사랑하시던 예수님의 삶을 본받으려는 신앙고백적 결단이었다. 산업선교를 하기로 작정하고 영등포산업선교를 찾아간 필자에게 조지송 목사는 아주 뜻밖의 말을 하였다. 그것은 누구든 산업선교를 하려는 사람은 1년간 공장에 가서 노동자로서 노동경험을 해야 하고 -그것은 충분히 이해가 가는 일이었고 얼마든지 받아들일 수 있는 조건이었다. – 그리고 자신의 생활비에 대한 재정적 지원(교회 혹은 기관)을 약속 받아야 한다는 것이었다. 다시 말하면 자기 월급을 누구에게 후원 받아 가지고 와야 한다는 것이었다. 자신(조지송 목사)도 영락교회에서 주는 월급을 받고 있으며 당시 여성 실무자이었던 강행림 전도사는 서울노회 여전도회연합회에서 그 월급을 후원 받고 있었다. 그러므로 필자에게도 그런 재정적 후원을 약속 받아 오라는 것이었다.

당시에 영등포산업선교회는 실무자 인건비는 각자 후원교회 혹은 기관에서, 선교사업비는 노회와 지역교회의 후원헌금으로 충당하는 아주 재미있는 제도를 가지고 있었는데 나중에 생각해보니 이 제도 때문에 영등포산업선교회가 외국교회의 원조에 기대지 않고 선교활동을 할 수 있었고 한국의 다른 사회선교기관들이 외원이 끊어지자 다 없어졌던 것과 같은 일이 없이 오늘날까지 유일하게 생존할 수 있는 요인이 되었다. 그런 의미에서 크게 평가받을 만한 선교구조이었다.

그리고 당연히 영등포산업선교 실무자들은 이중소속을 갖게 되었다. 즉, 조지송 목사는 영락교회 소속목사로서 영등포산업선교회에 파송되어 영등포산업선교의 실무자로서 일을 하게 된 것이다. 그러므로 영등포 산업선교 실무자들은 각각 소속된 교회, 기관이 다르고 그 기관이나 교회가 영등포산업선교회에 파송해서 함께 일하게 된 것이다. 그래서 영등포실무자들은 늘 자기를 파송한 교회나 기관과 긴밀한 관계를 갖고 정기적으로 산업선교활동을 보고하곤 하였다.

물론 이와 같은 훌륭한 제도는 1970년대 말 한국정부의 정보기관이 파송교회나 기관에 압력을 가해서 할 수 없이 중단하게 되었고 결국 영등포산업선교회도 1980년초부터 다른 사회선교단체처럼 선교회 스스로가 재원을 마련해서 실무자들의 월급을 줄 수 밖에 없게 되었다. 하여간 이러한 상황 속에서 영등포산업선교회가 필자에게 재정후원자를 찾아오라고 한 것은 너무도 당연한 일이었고, 필자는 이 일을 변조은 목사와 의논하여 호주선교부가 필자의 재정후원자가 되겠다고 약속해서 드디어 필자가 영등포산업선교회에 일을 할 수 있게 되었다.

그리고 이와 같은 필자에 대한 호주장로교회(후에는 연합교회)의 재정적 지원은 필자가 영등포산업선교회를 떠나는 날까지 13년동안 계속해서 주어졌다. 필자는 호주교회가 파송한 한국인 선교사였던 셈이다. 그래서 필자는 늘 생각하기를 필자가 13년동안 영등포산업선교회에서 이룩한 공헌과 한국의 민주화와 인권증진활동, 노동운동에 끼친 공헌이었다면 그것은 필자를 재정적으로 지원하며 그런 일을 하게 한 호주교회에 드려야 한다고 늘 생각하고 있다. 그리고 한편 필자가 왜 한국교회의 지원을 받는 한국교회가 파송한 실무자로서 활동하지 못했나 하는 아쉬움과 섭섭함이 있다. 결과적으로 70년대 영등포산업선교회 활동은 호주교회와 함께 한 선교의 사역이었고 이 같은 호주교회의 공헌을 잊지 말고 기억해야 하며 역사에 기록해야 마땅할 것이다.

또한 호주교회에 대해서 기억해야 할 것은 호주교회는 필자에 대한 계속적인 재정적 지원뿐 만 아니라 영등포산업선교회가 정부로부터의 탄압으로 고난을 받을 때 온 교회가 기도와 격려로 그리고 한국정부에 대한 항의로 또 세계교회와의 연대와 협력을 통해서 영등포산업선교회를 눈물겹게 지원해왔다. 산업선교와 노동운동을 지원하기 위한 모금활동, 기도모임, 호주교회 안에서의 관심을 불러일으키는 일 등을 열심으로 해서 우리를 지원하였다. 주일학교 공과 책의 한 단원을 영등포산업선교회를 소개하는 내용으로 실었고, 매해 영등포산업선교활동을 소개하는 달력을 만들어 호주교회 안에 배포하며 영등포산업선교활동에 관심과 기도를 불러일으켰다.

이와 같은 호주교회의 적극적인 관심과 지원과 협력은 호주교회가 우택인 목사의 뒤를 이어 1976년 나병도(Steven Lavender)선교사를 보낸 후 6명의 선교사를 계속해서 영등포산업선교로 보낸 사실에서 더욱 분명하게 증명하고 있다.

필자에 대한 호주교회의 지원은 필자가 영등포를 떠난 1984년에 이어 그 후 2년간 그리고 1981년 1년간 호주에 머무를 수 있도록 온 가족에 대한 재정적 지원까지 계속 되었다.

결론적으로 영등포산업선교회는 한국교회와 호주교회가 함께 협력하여 수행한 선교활동이었다 해도 과언이 아니며 그러므로 영등포산업선교회가 받는 칭찬과 역사 속에서 인정받는 업적이 있다면 그것은 당연히 호주교회의 몫이었음을 잊지 말아야 할 것이다.

 5. 나병도 (Steven Victor Lavender, 1976-1978)

영등포 산업선교 초기 호주장로교선교부가 파송한 우택인 목사가 호주로 돌아간 후 영등포산업선교회에는 미국 남장로교 선교부 소속선교사인 함부만 선교사가 와서 일하게 되었다. 함부만 선교사는 그의 할아버지 때부터 우리나라에 와서 대대로 일하던 집안의 사람이다. 그러나 그는 노동자선교에 특별한 사명이나 관심이 없어 보였고 실무자들과도 잘 협력하지 못하다가 결국 당시 예장산업선교 실무자들의 요청으로 본국으로 돌아가게 되었고 영등포산업선교회는 다시 선교 동역자를 찾게 되었다.

당시 영등포산업선교회가 선교사를 필요로 하는 것은 몇 가지 이유에서였다. 첫째는 산업선교가 하는 일의 성격 상 외국 선교기관( CCA, WCC 및 각 나라의 산업선교단체)과의 긴밀한 연락을 갖기 위하여 영어능력이 있는 사람이 꼭 필요했고 둘째는 외국에서 찾아오는 손님들에게 산업선교활동내역을 잘 설명할 수 있는 역할을 하는 사람이 있어야 했고, 셋째로는 외국교회가 파송한 선교사가 있으므로 산업선교를 탄압하던 정부가 산업선교를 함부로 대하지 못하게 하는 효과가 있었고, 마지막으로 산업선교활동을 못마땅하게 여기던 한국교회에 오랜 선교협력관계에 있는 정통 협력교단(미국장로교, 호주장로교 등)대표가 산업선교에 관심을 가지고 협력하는 모습을 보여주므로 한국교회 안에서 산업선교의 정당성을 확인하는 의미가 있었으며, 또 선교사를 파송한 교회로부터 약간의 재정적 지원을 기대하는 면도 있었다. 이와 같은 다양한 이유로 선교사가 꼭 필요했고 영등포산업선교회는 호주장로교회에 선교사 파송을 요청하기에 이르렀다.

더구나 당시에 영등포산업선교회에 대하여 많은 관심을 가지고 필자를 영등포산업선교회에 보내고, 인건비 등 재정적 지원을 하고 있던 변조은 목사가 호주장로교 해외 선교부 총무로 있었으니 호주장로교에 선교사 파송을 요청하는 것은 당연한 일이었다.

당시 영등포산선 총무였던 필자는 호주장로교회에 선교사 파송을 요청하면서 다음과 같은 조건을 제시하였다. 첫째는 한국사람이 사는 집에서 살아야 한다. 둘째, 영등포산업선교회 실무자들이 받는 사례비 기준으로 월급을 받아야 한다. 셋째는 선교사에 대한 사례비는 호주교회가 직접 주어서는 안되고 영등포산업선교위원회로 보내서 영등포산선이 지급해야 한다. 셋째, 영등포산선 실무자들과 똑 같은 시간, 똑 같은 조건으로 일해야 한다. 마지막으로 산업선교 일을 하기 전, 어학연수 이외에 산선 실무자로서의 최소한의 훈련을 받아야 한다.    

호주교회에 내세운 이와 같은 조건은 당시로서는 파격적인 제안이었다. 왜냐하면 당시만하더라도 미국선교사들은 한국사람과 같이 살지 않고 연희동에 선교사타운을 지어놓고 살며 월급은 자기네 나라기준으로 자기나라 선교부에서 직접 받았고 행정적으로도 한국교회의 지시를 받지 않고 독립적으로 일하던 때이었기 때문이다. 그러므로 이 같은 영등포 산선의 선교사 파송 조건은 한국에 있던 선교사 사회는 물론 한국에 선교사를 오랫동안 파송해 오던 다른 나라 교회의 해외 선교부에 큰 충격과 파장을 불러일으켰다. 그런데 재미있는 일은 이 제안을 받은 호주장로교 세계선교부는 이를 흔쾌히 동의하고 이런 조건으로 한국에 갈 선교사를 찾는 광고를 게재하였고 이에 자원하여 나선 사람이 나병도(Steven Victor Lavender)선교사이며 그는 그 동안 한국에 온 그 수많은 해외교회선교사들 가운데 전례를 깨고 전혀 새로운 차원의 선교협력 관계를 시작한 최초의 선교사가 되었다.

스티븐은 호주 빅토리아의 부유한 집안의 아들로 멜버른에 있는 명문 링우드 고등학교와 멜버른 대학을 졸업했다. 그는 대학을 졸업한 후 그의 전공을 따라 회계사로 일을 하였고 인종착취에 반대하는 운동에도 참여하였는데 이는 그가 대학생활 중 해왔던 기독학생운동의 영향이 있었을 것이다. 호주장로교 세계선교부는 그를 한국의 영등포산업선교회에 선교동역자로 보내면서 다음과 같은 임무를 부여하였다고 한다.  (변조은 저, 『은혜의 증인들에서』)

귀하는 큰 산업도시인 영등포에서 장로교 산업선교 팀과 함께 일하게 될 것이다. 이 팀은 함께 공부하고 실천하며, 상호 격려하기 위해 만나고, 매달 지원하는 약 200팀의 노동자들과 함께 일하고 있다. 그들은 자신들을 지원하고 세계 그리스도인의 연대를 표현하기 위해 함께 일할 외국인을 요청하였다. 귀하는 노동자들과 함께 공부하고 실천하는 데 완전히 참여하면서 그들의 문제와 열망에 대해 응답해야 한다. … 귀하는 영등포에서 도시산업선교의 부분이 될 것이다.

스티븐은 1976년 6월 7일 서울에 도착했고 곧바로 영등포산선이 마련한 양평동의 판자집에서 살면서 낮에는 연세대학교 한국어학당에서 한국 말을 배웠다. 스티븐이 살던 양평동 판자집의 방은 집 옆으로 비스듬이 달아낸 방으로 키가 큰 스티븐은 그의 방 반은 서 있을 수 있었으나 방의 반은 허리를 굽혀야 하는 열악한 환경이었다. 또 그 해 여름 장미철에는 지붕이 새서 방안에 그릇을 들여놓고 빗물을 받았고 또 재래식화장실에서 그는 생활하였다.

이런 환경 속에서 그가 어떻게 버텼는지 지금 생각하면 참 미안하고 훈련이기는 하지만 너무 심했다는 생각을 하지만 당시 그가 함께 일 해야 할 여성노동자들은 그보다 더 열악한 환경 속에서 살고 있었으므로 그런 훈련이 필요하다 생각했고 그의 이와 같은 6개월 동안의 훈련은 그가 영등포 산선에서 일할 때 그가 만나는 노동자들을 더 이해할 수 있고, 일체감을 가치며 노동자들의 아픔을 함께 느낄 수 있는 좋은 훈련이 되었다. 그래서 그의 영등포 산선에서의 선교사역기간이 비록 짧았지만(약 2년) 그 어느 누구보다도 큰 역할을 할 수 있었다 하겠다.

스티븐은 산선에서 열심으로 일했다. 소그룹 모임에 오는 노동자들을 만나서 얘기를 나누고 당시 영등포 산산과 관련된 각종 노사문제에 적극적으로 참여하였다. 노동자들을 탄압하는 군사정부에 반대하는 노동자집회가 열릴 때마다 그는 빠지지 않고 참여하였고 (이런 일은 선교사들에게 매우 조심스럽고 주저되는 일이었다) 키가 큰 그의 모습은 산업선교를 감시하며 반정부집회에 참석하는 사람을 체크하는 한국군사정부의 정보기관에 뚜렷하게 노출되었을 것이 틀림없다.

특히 스티븐의 중요한 활동은 영등포산업선교회에서 일어나는 일과 당시 한국의 민주화운동의 일들을 영문으로 작성하여 온 세계 매스컴과 특히 해외교회와 CCA, WCC 등 해외 교회에 알리는 일이었고 아마 스티븐의 이 같은 활동이 한국정부당국의 주목을 받는 일이 되었을 것이다. 스티븐은 영등포산선을 찾아오는 수많은 외국언론기관의 기자들과 에큐메니칼 손님들에게 한국 안에서의 노동자 인권의 억압상황과 그들의 투쟁에 대한 이야기를 설명하는 일에 열심을 다하였다.

그는 특히 다국적 기업의 종사자들의 인권에 대해 관심을 가졌고 이에 대한 국제적 연대와 관심을 불러일으키는 일에 참여하였다.

스티븐이 영등포에서 일하던 1976-1978년은 한국 군사정부가 민주화운동과 노동자 인권운동에 대하여 많은 탄압을 하던 때이었고 영등포산업선교는 이 같은 정부의 탄압에 중요한 타켓이 되었다. 왜냐하면 당시 영등포산선에는 한달에도 수천명의 노동자들이 드나들었고 이것은 정부나 기업에 큰 골칫거리였다 말하자면 거대한 반정부조직이요 군사통치에 반대하는 민주화운동의 중심지였다. 이러므로 정부는 여러가지 방법으로 산업선교를 탄압하고 와해시키려는 시도를 하였다. 산선을 용공으로 몰아서 교회와 사회로부터 격리시키려고 온갖 산선을 비난하고 모략하는 거짓책자들을 펴내여 노동자들과 교회에 배포하였고 매스컴을 동원하며 산업선교를 공격하는 선전활동을 자행하였다.

이런 집요한 정부의 산선에 대한 감시와 탄압, 억압에도 산선이나 그와 관련된 노동자들이 동요하지 않고 오히려 그 활동이 강화되자 정부는 마침내 산선 탄압의 결정적인 조치를 단행하였다. 즉 1978년 5월 1일, 한국군사정부는 필자를 긴급조치 9호 위반혐의로 긴급체포 구속하였다. 청주산업선교회의 고난 받는 농민들을 위한 기도회에서 행한 설교를 트집잡아 그 내용이 긴급조치 위반이라는 것이었다.

참으로 놀라운 사실은 나중에 공소장을 받아보니 필자가 설교본문으로 읽은 구약 미가서 2장 1~2절 말씀과 7장 2~3절 말씀 그대로 글자 하나 틀리지 않고 공소사실로 기록한 것이다. 즉 하나님의 말씀이 긴급조치9호를 위반한 꼴이 되었고 필자가 아닌 미가 선지자가 긴급조치 9호 위반으로 법정에 서서 재판을 받아야 하는 형국이 되었다. 더욱 기가 막힌 것은 이 사건을 지휘한 부장검사가 본 교단소속(소망교회) 장로인 이진우라는 사람이다. 장로가 목사를 그것도 성경본문을 긴급조치 위반이라고 구속하고 재판에 넘겼다는 사실이다. 정부당국은 필자를 구속할 뿐 아니라 산선에서 운영하던 신용협동조합에 대한 대대적 감사를 실시하여 결국에는 우리나라 최초의 신용조합(허가번호 1호)에 대해 폐쇄명령을 내렸고 또 한편 그 동안의 영등포산선의 모든 회계장부를 압수하며 세무공무원들을 동원하여 한 달여 동안 부정한 재정지출이었는지를 샅샅이 조사하였다.

그리함에도 단 한 건의 문제가 될만한 회계 처리를 찾아내지 못하였는데 나중에 이 조사에 참여했던 세무공무원이 몰래 찾아와 산업선교 목사님들을 너무 존경한다. 자기가 오랫동안 회계 감사를 했지만 이런 단체는 처음 보였다고 고백하는 일도 있었다. 이 와중에 당연히 정부당국의 탄압의 표적은 스티븐에게 돌아갔고 그의 비자갱신을 거부하고 6월 20일까지 한국을 떠나라는 추방명령이 내려지게 되었다. 추방이유인즉, 스티븐이 그의 입국 목적인 종교활동보다는 정치활동에 관여했기 때문이라는게 한국정부의 공식답변이었고 결국 스티븐은 6월 20일 많은 노동자들과 한국교회 지도자들의 눈물 속에 한국을 떠나 호주로 돌아가게 되었다.

이때 스티븐은 자신의 심정을 이렇게 고백했다. “예수께서 세상에 계실 때 보여주신 모범을 따라 살기 위해 애쓰는 중에 나의 신상이 가난하고 억압받는 사람들과 함께 일하도록 나를 강제하고 있다” (변조은 저 『은혜의 증인들』 중에서 인용)

결국 스티븐은 그가 따르려고 했던 예수님의 경우처럼 가난하고 억울함을 당한 사람들과 함께 하며 그들을 돕는 것이 종교적인 것이 아니라 정치적인 것이었다고 덮어씌우려 십자가에 처형을 당했던 것처럼 그도 똑 같은 경우를 당하게 된 것이다. 산업선교를 탄압하고 없애려 했던 조사정부의 시도는 절대 성공하는 것처럼 보였지만 결국 실패하고 오히려 산업선교활동은 더욱 강화되게 되었다. 미가서 성경구절로 필자를 기소한 사건은 보수적인 한국교회를 분노하게 했고 그동안 산업선교를 비난하고 탄압하고 정부의 정책이 얼마나 거짓된 것이며 산업선교가 얼마나 그리스도의 목숨과 말씀에 든든히 서서 일하는 선교기관인가를 온 세상에 그리고 한국교회안에 적나라하게 들어내는 사건이 되었다.

호주로 추방된 스티븐은 한국에 있을 때보다도 한국의 노동자 인권을 위하여 그리고 한국의 민주화를 위하여 더 많은 일을 하였으며 특히 호주국민들에게 또 호주교회에 한국의 인권과 민주화를 위한 지원을 이끌어 내는 일에 크게 공헌하였다. 하나님이 하시는 일은 때로 사람의 생각을 뛰어넘는 역사로 나타남을 본다. 호주의 젊은 청년선교사 스티븐 빅터 라벤더의 경우가 그러하다.

 6. 안도선 (Antony David Francis Dawson, 1981-1985)

스티븐 라벤더가 한국정부로부터 추방된 이후 영등포산업선교회와 호주교회는 스티븐의 뒤를 이어 일을 할 호주선교사를 찾고 초청하는 일에 여러 방면으로 노력을 하였다. 그 일은 그렇게 말처럼 쉽지 않았다. 우선 한국정부가 허락을 안 했고 또 적당한 후임자도 찾기가 힘들었다. 그러나 영등포 산업선교회는 외국선교사가 절실히 필요로 하였다. 이때 떠오른 인물이 토니 도슨이다.

그는 본래 호주 시드니 출신으로 맥커리대학에서 역사와 심리학을 전공한 후, 1979년 4월 한국에 와서 대전에 있는 대전 숭실대학교에서 영어회화를 가르치는 일로 한국에서의 그의 선교사역을 시작하였다.

그 곳에서 2년 동안의 영어회화를 가르치는 임기가 끝날 때쯤 토니는 호주교회와 영등포산선으로부터 영등포에 와서 함께 선교사역에 참여할 것을 요청받아 1981년 영등포산선에 스티븐 라벤더 후임선교사로 일을 시작하게 되었다. 당시 호주연합교회(장로교, 감리교회 회중교회연합)의 선교부총무였던 변조은 목사는 그의 책 『은혜의 증인들』에서 그에게 준 임명장의 내용을 아래와 같이 적고 있다.

교회는 그대가 하나님 나라의 복음을 특히 가난하고 주변화된 사람들에게 전하도록 하기 위해, 가장 고통 받고 있는 사람들 가운데서 하나님 나라의 삶을 살도록 하기 위해, 그리고 권역을 부당하게 사용하는 사람들 에게 도전하도록 하기 위해 그대를 선교사로 파송한다. 그대의 사역은 주로 교회 바깥에 있는 사람들에게 집중될 것이다. 한 사람의 국외자로서 그대의 존재는 죽음에서 부활하신 우리 주 예수 그리스도에 의해 갱신된 인류의 일치를 증언하는 것이 될 것이다. 그대의 메시지, 그대의 삶과 사역은 하나이다. …그대의 임무를 실천하는 것은 UIM 총무에게 책임을 맡긴다.

토니 도슨의 임무는 그의 전임자들이 하던 일이었던 특히 외국교회들과 세계 여러 기독교 기관들(CCA,WCC)과 긴밀한 관계를 유지하는 것이다. 그러나 그는 언어의 어려움이 그의 일에 많은 지장을 주었음을 스스로 고백하기도 하였고 무엇보다도 당시 영등포산업선교의 복잡하고 급변하는 변화에 대해 잘 적응하지 못하는 어려움을 겪었던 것 같다. 그 때는 1980년 광주민주항쟁 이후이었고 한국사회는 급격한 혼란, 전두환 신군부의 등장과 박정희 정부 때보다도 더 극심한 탄압이 자행되던 때 이므로 이에 따라 산업선교도 거의 없어질 만큼의 호된 탄압에 시달렸고 한국사회 특히 민주화운동, 노동운동에 불어 닥친 이념논쟁으로 정신을 차릴 수 없었던 시기였다. 또 1984년 5월 그 동안 산선총무로 일하던 필자가 영등포를 떠나고 새로운 실무자들(이근복, 손은하 목사 등)이 산선의 책임을 맡는 등 그야말로 격동기였다. 그래서 외국선교사로서 그 모든 급변하고 복잡한 상황에, 어려움을 적응할 수 있었겠는가 가히 짐작이 가는 일이다. 그러나 토니 도슨은 한국을 사랑하는 사람이었고 한국을 좋아하는 사람이었고 늘 조용하고 온화함으로 그 모든 변화를 지켜보며 자신이 해야 할 일을 찾아서 성실하게 일했다. 당시 그와 함께 일했던 영등포산선의 실무자들과 노동자들은 토니 도슨과 함께 했던 추억을 잊지 않고 늘 회상하곤 한다. 그는 1985년 호주에 돌아갔다가 1988년 다시 대전의 한남대학에 와서 영어를 가르치다가 1991년 7월 호주로 영구 귀국하였다.

 7. 임경란(Kelly Yim, 1986-1991)

토니 도슨 이후 호주의 많은 젊은이들이 줄을 이어서 영등포산업선교에 와서 일하므로 영등포산선과 호주교회는 오랫동안의 역사적 관계를 유지하고 발전하여 왔다. 토니 도슨의 후임으로 영등포산업선교회에 선교사로 온 사람은 임경란(Kelly Yim)인데 그녀는 호주이민1.5세대인 한국교포청년으로 호주교회의 선교사가 되어 한국에 와서 일한 최초의 기록을 세웠다. 임경란과 그 이후의 영등포산선에 와서 일한 호주선교사들의 이야기는 변조은 목사가 쓴 은혜의 증인들에서 그대로 인용하여 기록하기로 한다. (이것에 대해서는 저자인 변조은 목사에게 허락을 받았음을 밝힌다.)

임경란은 대구에서 태어났고, 그의 부모와 함께 1976년에 호주로 이민을 떠났다. 그녀는 랜드윅(Randwick) 여자고등학교와 시드니 대학에서 공부했고 과학에서 우등성적을 받았다. 그녀는 학생시설에 학생기독운동에 참여했다. 그녀는 인명진 목사가 호주에 있는 동안 이끄는 공부 모임에 참여했고 한국에서 가서 착취당하는 노동자들과 함께 일하겠다는 열망을 표현했다. 영등포산업선교회는 토니 도슨의 후임으로 함께 일할 수 있도록 그녀를 초청하였다. 임경란은 타고난 쾌활한 성격과 분석적인 사회경제학적, 정치의식을 지니고 있었다. 연합교회 세계선교위원회(CFWM)는 1986년 2월에 전임자에게 주었던 것과 비슷한 위임장을 주면서 그녀를 임명했다.  

   

교회는 그대가 하나님 나라의 복음을 특히 가난하고 주변화된 사람들에게 전하도록 하기 위해, 가장 고통 받고 있는 사람들 가운데서 하나님 나라의 삶을 살도록 하기 위해, 그리고 권역을 부당하게 사용하는 사람들 에게 도전하도록 하기 위해 그대를 선교사로 파송한다. 그대의 사역은 주로 교회 바깥에 있는 사람들에게 집중될 것이다. 한 사람의 국외자로서 그대의 존재는 죽음에서 부활하신 우리 주 예수 그리스도에 의해 갱신된 인류의 일치를 증언하는 것이 될 것이다. 그대의 메시지, 그대의 삶과 사역은 하나이다. …그대의 임무를 실천하는 것은 UIM 총무에게 책임을 맡긴다. 

켈리는 1986년 5월 29일 서울에 도착해서 즉각 UIM의 투쟁에 참여하였고, 정부의 노동자 탄압과 UIM 직원들에 대한 체포에 관한 정보를 세계 전역에 보냈다. 경찰이 오전 3시 UIM 사무실 문을 부수고 침입했을 때 켈리는 3주 동안 한국에 있지 않았다. 그러나 그녀는 여전히 늦게까지 초과근무를 하였다. 그녀는 군사정부 아래서 어려운 시절, 줄곧 일을 했고 무슨 일이 얼어지고 있는지에 대해 훌륭한 분석과 코멘트를 첨가해서 바깥 세계에 알렸다.

 그녀는 한국의 UIM을 찾아노는 많은 방문자들을 만나서 하나님의 정의를 약자와 가난한 자에게 전달하려고 헌신하는 UIM 일꾼들의 삶과 투쟁을 그들에게 소개했다. 그녀는 한국에서 벌어지는 일들을 가장 저임금을 받는 노동자들의 관점에서 이해할 수 있도록 도왔다.

 켈리는 1988넌 12월 25일 한성주 씨와 결혼했다. 그 후 그녀는 2년을 더 UIM에서 일했고 1998년 1월 말, 남편과 어린 두 딸 지선과 지인과 함께 호주로 돌아갔다.

8. 차민희 (데브라 자넷(데비) 카슨, 1990-1993)

데비 카슨은 브리즈번에서 자랐고 무루카(Moorooka)초등학교, 세인트 피터 루터란 칼리지, 퀸즐랜드 대학에서 교육을 받았다. 그녀는 퀸즐랜드 록햄프턴(Rockhampton)의 기독교 가정센터에서 1986년 1월부터 1988년 12월까지 상담자로 일했고, 여행할 수 있는 범위 안에서 다양한 병원사회사업 일을 하였다. 1989년 3월에 데비는 선교사가 되기 위해 지원하였다. 그녀는 선교 프로그램 안에 인턴과정에 흥미를 가졌다.

데비는 영등포 도시산업선교(UIM)에 지원하였다. 그곳은 다른 국가에 있는 사람들에게 한국인들과 연대성을 가지고 활동하는 통로를 열었기 때문에 중요한 배치라고 보았다. 데비는 브리즈번에서 한국어 공부를 시작하였다. 그녀는 이전 선교사들과 브리즈번에서 살면서 가르치고 있는 한국인들로부터 할 수 있는 한 모든 것을 배웠다. 그리고 인턴을 위한 두 달 사전 훈련 프로그램을 이수했다.

한국 정부와 한국장로교회에 사이에 비자발행을 위한 긴 교섭들이 있었다. 데비는 최종적으로 1990년 9월에 한국에 도착했다. 그녀는 빨리 배웠고 곧 UIM과 산업노동자들의 사정에 관한 해외 배포용 영어 회보를 발간하기 시작했다. 그녀는 사전 편지들을 통해서 지속적인 탄압에 대한 정부를 나누었다. 그녀는 사회적으로, 경제적으로, 그리고 정치적으로 한국에서 무슨 일이 일어나고 있는지 바닥의 관점에서 날카로운 분석을 제공했다. 데비는 한 명의 UIM 직원과 함께 그녀의 숙소를 공유했다. 그녀는 다국적 기업(TNC’s)들의 정책과 활동들에 관한 이슈를 다루는 일을 했다.

 1992년 3월에 데비는 세계선교부의 임명을 6개월 연장해 달라고 신청했다. 1993년 2월까지, 그녀는 다른 아시아 국가로부터 온 노동자들의 UIM방문을 조정하고 한국의 프로젝트들을 연결시켰다. 그녀는 또한 한국노동자의 일부 그룹들이 해외 컨퍼런스에 참여할 때 동반했다. 그녀는 UIM의 필수적인 부분이 되었다.

 영등포 도시산업선교에 대한 그녀의 경험은 호주로 돌아간 후에 불리한 산업노동자들과 특히 아시아 여성 노동자들과 함께 15년 동안 일하도록 고무시켰다. 그 일이 그녀가 현재도 지속적으로 행하고 있는 가치 있는 일이다.

9. 데브라 굿서,1992-1993

데브라 굿서는 뉴 사우스 웨일스의 헌터리존(the Hunter Region)에서 자랐다. 우등으로 학사학위와 교육학 디플로마를 마친 후에, 데브라는 브록큰 힐(Broken Hill) 고등학교에서 가르치고 있을 때 선교사역에 관심을 표시했다.

서울에 있는 아시아여성정보센터(AWRC)의 소장 이선애 목사와 상당한 교섭 후에, 데브라는 여러 아시아 여성신학자들이 쓴 AWRC 신학 논문들의 저널을 출판하기 위해 편집하고 준비하는 일을 돕는 선교인턴으로 임명되었다. 그러나 많은 이유로 이곳은 만족한 배치가 되지는 못했다. 데브라에게 이곳의 전반적인 경험은 성장이기 보다는 부정적이고 소진하는 것이었다. 그러나 한 가지 긍정적인 측면은 데브라가 서울에 있는 지역교회와 긴밀한 관계를 발전시킨 것이었다. 그들을 데브라를 위한 그리스도가 되었고 그녀를 깊이 보살펴 주었다.

 호주로 돌아간 후에, 데브라는 인턴으로서 그녀의 봉사를 마치기 위해 국경 서비스와 오지 가족 서비스 프로그램을 위해 한동안 일했다.

10. 송영진 (엘렌 그린버그, 1994,1997)

 엘렌 그린버그는 타스마니아 대학에서 상업학사(B.C.), 교육학 디플로마를 마쳤다. (한국에서 임무를 마친 후에 그녀는 또한 1998~1999년에 사회봉사 디플로마를 마쳤다.)

 그녀는 3년의 임기의 UIM의 협력자로 영등포에 가도록 임명되었고, 1994년 5월 30일 서울에 도착했다. 그녀는 한국에 있는 동안 타스마니아에 있는 교회로부터 편지와 메시지를 통해 엄청난 움직이는 지원을 받았다.

그녀의 주요 역할은 국제적인 연락관이었다. 그녀는 영등포 산선의 활동가들과 한국의 노동운동에 대해 관심 있는 사람이면 누구든지 영어로 정보를 제공했다. 이 일은 전 세계에 관심 있는 조직들과 개인들에게 발송되는 계간 영어 회보를 편집하는 것을 포함하였다.  거기서 그녀의 임기의 후반기에 그녀에게 주어진 발전된 역할은 아시아의 다른 부분에서 온 활동가들에게 한국 노동운동과 민주화 운동의 역사에 관하여 교육하는 것이었다.

 이것은 아시아 URM과 연결되었다.

 엘렌은 후에 다음과 같이 기록했다.

3년 동안, 나는 긍정적인 사회변화를 이룩하기 위해 헌신하는 사람들과 함께 살았다. 내가 한국에 도착했을 때 나는 영성과 사회적 책임 사이의 관계에 대해 매우 관심이 컸다. 내가 한국을 떠날 때 나는 이 두 가지 주제가 뗄 수 없이 연결되어 있는 것을 알게 되었다. 사회적 책임 없는 영성은 단지 삶의 고통에서 도피하는 한 형태에 불과한 것이며, 영성 없는 사회적 책임은 생기가 빠져나간 에너지에 불과한 것이었다. 그러나 나는 또한 영성이란

 그녀는 다른 문화 안에서 사는 것을 발견했고, 새로운 언어와 함께 도전적이면서도 때로는 매우 거친 새로운 사회적인 규범을 배웠다. 여러 번 그녀가 포기하지 않고 일을 지속할 수 있는 능력을 발견할 수 있었던 것은 친구들이나 협력자들로부터 온 것이 아니었다. 이것은 그녀의 자신의 영성 및 신학 이해에 중대한 성장의 시간이었다.

 그녀는 UIM에 연결된 작은 교회의 이름인 ‘성문 밖’을 좋아했다. 그녀는 사람들이 가장 기대하지 않았던 성문 밖이 하나님께서 아주 자주 발견될 수 있는 곳이라는 것을 깨달았다. 그녀는 자신과 세계를 위한 하나님의 사랑의 깊은 확실성을 개발하였다. 그녀는 기독교이든 아니든, 한국 민중의 깊은 헌신성으로부터 많은 것을 배웠다.

10. 로한 스콧 잉글랜드, 2000-2006

 로한 잉글랜드는 찰스스튜트 대학 재학시절, 대학그리스도인친교(University Christian Fellowship)에 활동적으로 참여했다. 그는 웨스트엡핑(West Epping)에서 교회 청년그룹의 지도자였다. 그는 원주민 화해운동에 참여했고 사회정의에 헌신했다. 영등포도시산업선교회로부터의 요청에 응하여 세계선교위원회는 로한을 초대하여 다음과 같은 책임을 지고 임무를 수행하도록 했다.

그것은 첫째로 UIM과 성문밖 교회의 삶에 전적으로 참여하는 것이었다. 둘째는 한국어, 문화, 관습들 학습이고, 셋째는 국제손님들을 위한 외출 프로그램 등 국제적 연대를 발전시킬 것, 연구와 영주 신문 준비, 그리고 넷째는 UIM의 국제 통신 처리 및 영문 보고서의 교정이었다.

로한은 영등포산선에 선교인턴으로 임명되었고, 2000년 5월 31일 서울에 도착하였다. 데비 카슨은 로한을 위해 호주에서 후원 그룹을 조직하는데 주도적으로 활동했다. 그는 6개월 동안 한국어를 공부하고, 그해 말 몇주간의 훈련을 받고 파송 예배에 참여하기 위해 호주로 돌아왔다. 그리고 그는 한국의 외국인 노동자들과 동남아시아의 노동활동가들을 위한 훈련 프로그램에 곧바로 참여하기 위해 한국으로 돌아갔다.

이 프로그램은 그 후 5년 동안 그의 중요한 책임 가운데 하나가 되었다. 그는 아시아기독교협의회(CCA)와 영등포산선이 협력하여 세우고 있는 아시아도시농촌선교 디아코니아 훈련센터(AURMDTC)에 배치되었다. 로한은 이 센터의 자원인력이었고, 그 후 6년 동안 아시아 전체에서 50명 이상의 도시농촌선교(URM) 활동가들을 위해 13개 훈련과정을 조직하고 수행하는 주요한 역할을 하였다.

로한은 UIM의 세계연대국에 배치되어 영어통신, 정기적 영어 회보발간, 웹사이트 개발에 대한 책임을 맡았다. 그는 또한 산업선교회에 부속된 회중들인 성문 밖 교회의 삶에도 깊이 참여했다.

로한은 영등포산선의 삶 속에 아주 빨리 정착했다. 그는 동료 및 노동자에 의해 사랑을 받았다. 다른 한편, 그는 함께 일하는 사람을 좋아했고 비록 매우 부담이 되었지만 그가 하는 일을 즐겼다. 그는 보다 정당한 사회를 위해 투쟁하는 사람들과 나란히 일하고 싶어했고, 그것은 정확하게 그가 영등포에 찾아낸 상황이었다. 그의 감독자는 1년 후에 그에 대해 ‘로한은 UIM의 많은 프로그램에 활발히 참가해서 우리의 진실한 협력자가 되었다.’고 보고했다. 그의 활동기간 끝 무렵, 그의 동료들은 그는 ‘아주 좋은 선교사’였다고 선언했다.

 로한의 사역 기간은 매년 연장되었고, 그는 2006년 말에 UIM에서의 사역을 완료했다. 그는 2005년 3월 12일에 송순애와 결혼했고, UIM과 함께 한 그의 사역을 마친 후에 안산 외국인노동자센터에 고용되어 아시아의 다른 부분에서 온 한국의 ‘손님 노동자들(guest workers)과 함께 일했다. 

Copyright 인명진

호주친구이야기: 해리 로버트

호주 친구 이야기: 해리 로버츠
Story of my Aussie friend: Harry Roberts

세상에서
가장 친한 그 친구는
내 목소리를
알아듣지 못하고 있었다
내 이름도
기억 못하고 있었다
그는
무슨 우유 이야기를 하며
잠깐 기다려 보라 하였다
그리고
잠시 후 
다 괜챦다고 하며
그는 전화를 끊으려고 하였다
해리! 해리!
황급히
그의 이름을 불렀지만
국제전화는
이미 통화가 끝난
신호음을 울리고 있었다
일 년 전
시드니 타운홀
다정한 연인처럼
우리는
커피를 마시었다
지난 날의 많은 추억들
우리는 잊지 않고 있었는데...
그때만해도
그 친구 정신이 흐리지 않았는데...
그는
내 평생
가장 친한 친구로 남아준 
올해 95세의
해리 로버츠이다

Copyright 양명득

호주시드니한인회와 찰스스터트대학교

호주시드니한인회와 찰스스터트대학교


호주 찰스스터트대학교에서 양명득 박사의 연구업적을 인정하며 수여한 어워즈



















호주연합교회 총회에서 양명득 박사의 10년 간의 주총회 사역을 기록으로 남기며 감사하는 감사장











호주시드니한인회에서 양명득 박사의 연구와 출판업적을 치하하며 수여한 공로장














호주연합교회 주총회에서 양명득 박사의 업적과 공로를 축하하며 보낸 감사의 글

 호주시드니한인회에서 양명득 박사의 연구와 출판업적을 치하하며 수여한 감사의 패

호주민주평통위원회에서 양명득 박사의 공적을 치하하며 수여한 감사의 패

Transforming Korean Churches in Australia

Transforming Korean Churches in Australia

Dr. Myong Duk Yang

           

1.         Korean Churches in Australia

Although many Korean visitors and residents in Australia had been Christians, the first Korean Church was born in Melbourne in 1973 and in Sydney in 1974. In the case of the Melbourne Korean church, it was in fact leadership of a lay person, Gi Young Nahm, who initiated the establishment of a Korean church. Nahm thought it was necessary for a Korean church to be formed in Melbourne because many Korean Christians were not attending any church due to cultural shock and language barriers. A Korean church would assist them to continue their worship life (Kim, 2004, 13). Soon Nahm made a visit to Alan Stuart who served as missionary in Korea for help. Interestingly, Stuart was initially not in favor of this idea.

Wrongly as I now recognize, I was reluctant to do this, thinking that since most of these Koreans had come to live in Australia, it would help their integration into Western society for them to worship regularly in their churches, albeit in English. Certainly and fortunately I failed to convince them. (Kim, 14)

Stuart’s memoir says that it was fortunate he failed to convince Nahm. Eventually Stuart was persuaded and was able to lead the first Korean congregation in 1973, with Nahm playing an important leadership role.

In the following year in Sydney, half a dozen Koreans met with John P. Brown who also was a missionary in Korea for 20 years on an occasion to welcome a visiting church leader from Korea. There they decided ‘to establish a Korean Christian Fellowship in order to provide opportunities for people to meet for worship in their mother tongue and provide an opportunity to meet for fellowship in the midst of the loneliness of migrant life’ (Brown, 264). This group would have also been encouraged by the establishment of a Korean church in Melbourne. Lay Korean leaders including the late Joon Hak Yoo, also played an important part in initiating Korean ministry in Sydney.

Not very long after the establishment of two churches, other Korean churches began to flourish everywhere in major cities in Australia. Soon after the two churches in Melbourne and Sydney joined the Uniting Church in Australia in 1977, a number of people began to establish separate congregations with different denominational backgrounds such as the Churches of Christ and the Presbyterian Church in Australia (Brown, 271).

In 1985, an interdenominational association called The Council of Ministers of Korean Churches in Australia was established by eight ministers in Sydney (Yang, 2004, 473). This then could mean that there were eight churches in Sydney. Since then, this ecumenical Council has been playing an important role in the Korean Christian community in Sydney, hosting events such as continuing education for ministers, evangelical revival rallies and monitoring certain heretical movements in the churches.

In January 1990, the newly launched monthly Korean magazine, Christian Review listed 39 Korean churches in Sydney. Through this magazine Korean Christians have become more informed about issues in Australia and beyond. The magazine remains a valuable resource for those who study the history of Korean immigrant churches in Australia.

In March 2005, the magazine listed 142 Korean churches in Sydney, two each in Wollongong and Newcastle, five in Canberra, 13 in Melbourne, 19 in Queensland, nine in Perth, three each in Adelaide and Tasmania, in total 198 congregations (Kwon, 2005). However, it is estimated that there are nearly 200 Korean churches in Sydney alone. As Gordon Dicker observed, ‘Koreans are of a religious disposition and when they join a church they attend regularly’ (Dicker, 1997, 7).

During the 1970s and 1980s, the role Korean churches played within the Korean community in Australia were crucial. They played a major role in terms of providing not only spiritual support but also ethnic identity and community welfare. Christian or not, many Koreans came to a church on Sundays ‘to share news of Korea, information about employment and accommodation, and news of other people’ (Brown, 266). The Korean churches provided a sense of fellowship for lonely immigrants and freedom from the pressure of speaking English. The Korean ministers often acted as counsellor, mediator, welfare worker, interpreter, guardian, friend, and even pick-up driver. As the Korean community grows, other social groups have taken over these services, but it has been an essential contribution of church ministers and leaders to the Korean community.

Among over 200 Korean churches in Australia, there are four different categories in terms of belonging to denominations. There are 1) independent denominations but not belonging to any denominations either in Korea or Australia, 2) denominations connected to  denominations in Korea, 3) denominations belonging to an Australian denominations, and 4) individual, independent congregations, not belonging any denominations (Yang, 2004, 31). Recently a group of Korean Presbyterian church has joined to a Korean denomination in America.  It would be an interesting task to research why these churches belong or do not belong to denominations in Korea and in Australia. There are complicated issues such as membership, identity, church growth, financial gains, theology, and mission relationship.

In a recent questionnaire done by Saesoon Presbyterian Church in Sydney, among the participants of Oceania Korean Ministers’ Couples Seminar, shows that Korean ministers consider ‘proclamation’ and ‘training discipleship’ the core values in their ministry. A large number of Korean churches are struggling to be financially self-sufficient and at the other pole, there are a number of large churches, with a membership of a couple of thousand (The 5^th Oceania Korean Ministers’ Couple seminar folder, Sydney, 2005).

It would be safe to say that most Korean churches tend to be conservative in their theology and the word ‘evangelism’ has a key role among many Korean ministers. For that reason, ministers play a central role in terms of preaching and leading Bible studies, and there are few women elders and ministers. The first generation of Korean churches in Australia appears to be less changeable than churches in their homeland Korea, holding onto traditions more firmly. Han, therefore argues that the Korean Church in Australia hinders rather than helps Korean-Australians as they undergo the process of becoming global citizens in multicultural Australia (Han, 2004, 115).

At the 1996 Australian Census, the major religions amongst Korean-born were Catholic (7,249 persons), Presbyterian (5,250 persons) and Uniting Church (4,673 persons). Of the Korean-born, 21.4 per cent stated ‘No Religion’. This was higher than that of the total Australian population (16.6 per cent).

2.         Korean Churches in the Uniting Church in Australia

To be a member of existing Anglo denomination has never likely to be a straightforward process. The nature of any church is to make use of highly intentional language of the term ‘all are welcome’. In a cross-cultural situation, there are invariably obstacles and misunderstandings. There is the often expressed desire to reproduce in the new land the customs and practices of what was taken for granted from the homeland. Some diasporic theologians argue that the church takes on extra roles for immigrant communities, creating safe spaces where familiar patterns of leadership, language and authority are exercised.

It is also not uncommon for members of the existing host church to insist on new-comers becoming assimilated, integrated or ‘one of us’. One of the great difficulties facing Korean Christians in their relationship with the Uniting Church is theological. This Australian denomination has the reputation for being ‘liberal’. Exactly what this means has not been subject to close critical scrutiny. What does the claim mean? Is it true? For what political and cultural purpose is the claim made?

To some extent the negative nature of the accusation is a reflection of the particular evangelical background of Korean Christianity. Again, there is an irony here. According to its Basis of Union, the UCA sees itself as both Catholic and Reformed. It often sees itself as an evangelical church, but clearly not in the way that some Korean people do. Most Korean members take the Bible literally. Using modern methods of biblical criticism is seen as liberal, reflecting a lack of faith in the Bible as the Word of God. Part of the dilemma then lies in how the UCA sees itself as being open to contemporary scholarship.

The Uniting Church ‘acknowledges that the Church has received the books of the Old and New Testament as unique prophetic and apostolic testimony, in which it hears the Word of God and by which its faith and obedience are nourished and regulated’ (Basis of Union par. 5). What this means in practice is that the Bible is said to incorporate the Word of God rather than being the Word of God in a more literal manner. At the same time the Uniting Church values scholarly interpreters of Scripture and the inheritance of literary, historical and scientific enquiry (Par. 11).

There is a further irony here. It is no accident that it could be argued that the most creative work on the theology of immigration, living in diaspora, being second-generation, and what it means to be cross-cultural has happened in the Uniting Church. The perceived ‘liberal’ nature of its theology has allowed contextual theology and issues of Christian identity to be explored in a relocated home. Many theological issues arise in terms of addressing how Gospel and culture relate.

This kind of work, though, is part of a much more complex terrain. The degree of discomfort is most often felt in the matter of moral practice. The most vivid example of this difficulty is the recent extended debate over leadership and sexuality. Most, if not all, member churches of the Council of Korean Churches signed and published a statement saying that the practice of homosexuality is contrary to the teaching of the Bible and therefore they would not recognise or call homosexual leaders into their congregations. Regardless of this, other denomination Korean churches see the UCA as holding an unacceptable theology and continue to criticize the UCA. This ‘liberal’ image poses a continual obstacle for prospective new congregations to join the Uniting Church.

The inclusion of recently arrived migrant communities into an existing denomination is far from being a straightforward process. There are a number of liminal experiences to be negotiated both in relationship to the new host denomination as well as with regard to the homeland churches. The common tendency is for the issues that arise to do with the role of language and culture, the relationship of Gospel to the culture and generational differences.

It should come as no surprise that there gradually emerges a desire to put a more formed, organisational frame of reference around these matters. It soon became clear that the reliance on good will and key persons is not enough.

The Korean experience in the UCA has been to put in place a process, which has led recently to the construction of a Korean Commission. The establishment of this body has not happened in a vacuum. There have been a number of steps, which needed to be completed before hand. The pivotal event was the setting up of the Council of the Korean Churches.

In February 1988, the Council of Korean Churches (Korean Council) in the Uniting Church in Australia was established. Those Korean ministers who belonged to UCA regularly met to pray and support each other and soon they formed a formal organisation for better administration and ministry for their member churches. This Korean Council had no official status within the UCA at that time, but soon the Council became an unofficial advisory group to the UCA in relation to Korean churches and ministers. Eleven churches in total were the founding members, seven in Sydney, and one each in Melbourne, Perth, Adelaide and Canberra. Kil Bock Hong was elected as the first chairperson of the Council.

The Council declared four goals of their mission at the inauguration service. ‘Firstly, we affirm the responsibility of mission to our own people. Secondly, we affirm to seek working together with other ethnic people. Thirdly, we affirm the need of the common work with other bodies of the church on the basis of co-operation and understanding. Lastly, we affirm the way of God to continue the reconciliation and unity with other churches’ (Order of Service, February 28, 1988).

This statement clearly recognizes their position in Australia as Koreans and in the Uniting Church as Korean churches. It seeks to call to mission beyond ethnicity, denomination and generation. This still has been a key task of mission and ministry of Korean churches.

One task for the Council was to understand the Uniting Church regulations and see how they were similar to or different from Korean church regulations. In this light, the Council developed the Kong Dong Kyu Jung (Korean By-Law) for the unity of ministry practice within the Uniting Church. As the number of Korean churches and its members increased and ministers had various denominational backgrounds, there was an urgent need to adopt a consistent by-law within the Constitution and Regulations of the Uniting Church. This issue became part of the major agenda for Korean churches in coming years.

Most Korean churches basically followed the Uniting Church Regulations but there were these cultural issues and differences, especially the understanding of the terms of office bearers. In Korea, particularly in the Korean Presbyterian Church tradition, there is the option of calling a minister (Danimmoksa) for a life long tenure. Elders (Jangno) too can be offered lifetime recognition. In addition there are some roles of leadership in Korean traditions that do not have an equivalent in the Uniting Church such as Bu-Moksa (assistant ministers); Jibsa (for male and female – doing a steward and service role) and Kwonsa (a role for women that usually involves visiting and caring ministry) — in most Presbyterian Churches in Korea, women are not allowed to be Elders. So this is one role they have that is recognised though it does not carry the same status and does not involve being ‘ordained’ as is the case of Elders in Korea.

Developing the Alternative Regulations that were adopted by the National Assembly Standing Committee in 1999, was a significant achievement of the Council. Of the 25 Korean congregations in the Uniting Church, the vast majority are currently using the Alternate Regulations. A review conducted in 2006, heard that Korean leaders express their appreciation for the flexibility and openness of the Uniting Church to allow for alternate regulations.

Within the Alternate Regulations there is a strong recommendation for women to be recognised as elders, following the ethos of UCA. Until now, there have been only four women inducted as Elders. So it appears that most Korean congregations are not therefore practicing Alternate Regulations 3.1.35 (c) From the date on which these alternate Regulations come into effect, at least half of newly elected Elders be women until at least one third of the Elders in active service are women. A gathering of Korean leaders in June 2006 gave attention to address this issue and explore ways congregations could further encourage the leadership of women.

However, one of the most remarkable developments for Korean churches in the UCA has been the forming of the Korean Commission in the NSW Synod. Now it is the time to turn to the issue.

                                                   

3.         The Debate on Establishing Korean Commission in UCA

In February 2005, the Assembly Multicultural Ministry Committee of Uniting Church in Australia (UCA) held its annual meeting in Brisbane.  One of the important issues it discussed was the criticism leveled at both the idea and subsequent practice of a separate Korean Commission in the life of the New South Wales Synod. The necessity for this discussion had arisen because of an article on the Commission published in the August 2004 edition of Uniting Church Studies (Son YR, “Korean Commission: Womb of Mono-Ethnic Presbyteries and Doom of the Uniting Church’s Vision for a Multicultural Church“,Vol.10, No. 2, August 2004, 11-21).

This Commission had only recently been set up. For a number of years, there had been a concern hold by a significant number of Korean ministers that they were unable to address their particular issues with the existing polity of the Uniting Church in Australia. In particular, participating in the presbytery meetings had been a problem for them in terms of such as lack of translation support, of culturally appropriate decision making process and of opportunity for leadership.  For that reason, the Korean ministers brought a proposal ‘to establish a Korean Presbytery’ at the 1998 and 2001 Synod Meetings, and it generated much emotion and rhetoric at the meetings without any resolution. And yet it was felt that a language and cultural based presbytery or commission was desirable. Eventually in 2003, a proposal brought by Board of Mission of the NSW Synod on establishing a Korean Commission on behalf of the Korean Council has been approved and in the following year the Commission was instituted.

The prospect of such a Commission had always been contentious. The most common reservation was that its establishment would compromise the integrity of the denomination’s governance. Its tendency was to fragment and open up the possibility of other such presbyteries or commissions based not just on language or culture, but also distinctive theological persuasions. The UCA might well run the risk of becoming disuniting. Even within the body of Korean ministers, there was ambivalence. Ever since the idea of a Korean Presbytery was first officially raised at the National Korean Churches Consultation in 1994, Yang Rae Son had been a vocal voice to oppose its establishment. It was reckoned that such a body would reproduce the power structures to be in force in the ‘home land’ Korean churches in a new land. It would make the task of the Korean community finding its place alongside a raft of other culture in the UCA more difficult. This broad picture was the background against which Son wrote and the Multicultural Ministry Committee met.

The specific issues raised by Son should be clearly defined and identified. The importance of this task cannot be under-estimated. The metaphor of womb and doom had been used by Son for the sake of illustrating his argument as to how this Commission was likely to put an end to the multicultural vision of this denomination. Rather than being a helpful step forward in the polity and witness of the church, the establishment of the Commission would instead become the womb that nurtures other mono-ethnic presbyteries. The vision of the multicultural church first agreed to by the national Assembly in 1985, was doomed to fragment and splinter.

At this meeting in Brisbane, a Korean minister represented the perspective of the Korean ministers in the Commission who had been much disappointed by the tone and nature of Son’s argument. They were upset with the Son’s extreme expression of the ‘womb and doom’ analogy and with the timing of the arrival of the article when the Commission was just born. On this occasion, some members asked the Assembly Multicultural Ministry Committee to write a letter to Son expressing this body’s disappointment on the timing and content of his article.

The reason why the Korean ministers wanted such a letter to be written lies in the status of the National Multicultural Ministry Committee. In the past, the Committee has been to the forefront of helping frame policy on matters of cultural diversity in the wider church. It had shown a particular interest in the setting up of national ethnic conferences, the reception of ministers, negotiating guidelines between ‘homeland’ churches and the UCA. It has repeatedly striven to provide resources that related the stories of what it has been like for member of diverse cultures to migrate to Australia.

This Committee had fulfilled the function of being an advisory forum for multicultural discussion. In the life of the UCA, there is no better constituted body to consult on the kind of fears both Son and the Korean representative harboured. The language of ‘vision’ has been a recurring theme in the work of this national Committee. For the representative to bring the feeling of the Korean ministers to this Committee immediately placed its concern inside a national forum that was itself made up of several cultures.

And yet it so happened that the Multicultural Ministry Committee decided not to accept the request to write a letter to Son. The Committee wanted to respect a range of different opinions on how we understand the church is culturally diverse. However, this discussion did not mean that the Committee then agreed with Son. Their preferred strategy was to declare a respect for a diversity of opinion in the life of the church and pass a resolution congratulating the establishment of the Korean Commission. It was recognised that the Commission would face many challenges and prayerful support was offered. “The Committee requested the National Director to write to the Korean Commission to congratulate the establishment of Korean Commission on behalf of the Committee, acknowledge some of the challenges they face and offering our prayerful support.” (The Assembly Multicultural Ministry Committee Minutes, 27/2-2/3, 2005)

It seems as if the Committee did not think that the matter was one of womb and doom. The members of the Committee had Son’s article at their disposal. There was no extended discussion on his essay per se. It was assumed that an article in reply would be written, but to date that has not been done. The issues raised and so well argued by Son have not yet received the critical and theoretical response they deserve. This business of how the construction of a mono-ethnic presbytery or commission relates to the aims and ethos of an overt commitment to multiculturalism is still an open question.

In the course of this thesis, the argument raised by Son will need to be examined in more depth. For the moment, this Brisbane episode functions like a prologue. It demonstrates some of the competing tensions that the call to be a multicultural church inevitably attracts.

The multicultural situation is not simple. Not just one migrant ethnic culture nor is the receiving church a homogeneous entity. It is subject to theological difference and perceived differences between states, town and country etc.

How one part of the church might respond to cultural diversity is not the same as it might happen elsewhere. The experience of the Korean community is not necessarily same as the Tongan and the difference between Son and some Korean ministers indicates alternative responses within the life of that community as well. How one migrant community relates to another is further thread in this web. All the while, in the background, is how the Uniting Church lives out its faith on Aboriginal land and negotiates its way into a post Christian world.

The UCA strategy – declared itself a multicultural church. The language of multiculturalism is understandable. It deserves the presence of many culture in one nation and geographic location. It has been a term widely used in Australian politics and history. Whether it is the best model for what is happening in the practice of ministry and the development of an appropriate theology is a moot point. The purpose of this thesis is to examine the its benefit and weakness and propose an alternative.

The Korean experience alluded to in the Brisbane exchange of views furnishes a window into this much bigger debate. Son’s metaphors of womb and doom open up a theological imperative that requires a much fuller discussion.

One of the Son’s concerns on the Korean Commission has been the language and communication. When the establishment of the Commission was approved at the 2003 Synod, one of the rationales was ‘to increase the participation of Koreans’ (The 2005 Synod Minutes) in the life of the church. Korean ministers have been arguing that they could not fully participate in the decision making process of the Presbytery and Synod due to the language barrier and culturally unfamiliar meeting processes. Son expresses a pessimism that having a Korean Commission would improve the communication or the participation to the wider church. Through a communication example with Kong Dong Kyu Jeong (Korean Regulations before the approval of Alternate Regulations for Korean Congregations), he says “the leaders of Korean Presbytery and officers of the Synod would continue to face serious communication problems.” (Son, 13)

Son also argues that the motivation of establishing the Commission was more political rather than missional. Quoting the dissenting voices of Korean people, he argues “at its core, (it is) politically prompted to help Korean ministers secure life-time tenure in settlement” (Son. 14) He continues saying, “Some Korean ministers argue that a Korean Presbytery could help them ‘emancipate’ their congregations from the white people’s ‘imperialistic control’ over Koreans within ‘white peoples’ presbyteries”. (Son, 15)

Another serious concern Son raises is “lacking theological reflections on the self-contradictory coexistence of ‘egalitarian principles’ and the ‘Korean hierarchical structure’. (Son, 16) He says, “As the Korean hierarchical church structure in the UCA has been fortified with ‘a shroud of sacredness’, Uniting Church leaders have not yet been prepared to illuminate the Korean-style rules in the light of the Gospel”. (Son, 15)

The issue of unity in diversity is also highlighted in Son’s article. “Is a mono-ethnic Presbytery (non-geographic council consisting of same language congregations) able to witness to the unity of the Church?” asks Son. (Son, 18) Quoting Davis McCaughey, Son argues that the Presbytery is the symbol of the unity of the church and “to set up a Korean Commission would create many other mono-ethnic presbyteries, and furthermore, it would nurture soils for ideological minorities to form their own presbyteries and finally become ghettoised.” (Son, 18) He laments in conclusion, “At the establishment of the Korean Commission, the Uniting Church lost its heart for unity, envisaging other mono-ethnic presbyteries in the pipeline.” (Son, 20)

While Son’s article provides an excellent opportunity for the church to further their discussion on ‘what we mean by our church is being a multicultural church’, there are some serious pastoral and theological concerns.

At the 2003 Synod meeting when the Synod passed the resolution for an establishment of the Korean Commission, Son was one of the few people who had the final speech, because the Moderator asked whether they, who opposed the establishment of the Korean Commission, could move on with the decision taken by the Synod. Son at that time spoke that although he had been opposing the proposal, he wished God’s blessing for the new journey the Korean community were to embark on. It was just a number of months later that he wrote the provocative article titled “Korean Commission: Womb of Mono-Ethnic Presbyteries and Doom of the Uniting Church’s Vision for a Multicultural Church”.

Some people within and outside of the Korean Commission expressed the pain and disappointment on the arrival of the article at a time of birthing the Commission. They feel like a child who is just trying to walk and having someone pushing them over. As a member of the Uniting Church, we are invited to respect the decision of the church, although we may not agree with it always. At the same time, Son knows that the Korean Commission is approved for an initial period of three years and the Synod will later have an opportunity to evaluate the viability and mission of the Commission. Son could not be avoided a criticism for the pastorally ill-timing deliverance of the article.

On the unity in diversity, Son’s anticipation on the development of many other ‘mono-ethnic presbyteries’ and ‘ideological minorities to form their own presbyteries’ is not only over exaggerated but also unfounded. In the minority ethnic communities in UCA, the needs have not been the same for their mission and ministry. Some communities experience a minimum level of language and communication problems since English has been one of their common languages. Some of the Pacific Islanders seem to be settling well in the local Presbyteries and participating in the process. In fact, a large number of Pacific Island leaders believe that their congregation should be part of the local Presbytery so that the members can be integrated into the UCA and the Australian society in large. At the same time, the National Conferences such as Tongan and Samoan provide a safe place for them to share their joys and struggles in UCA in their own languages. Only a couple of Pacific groups, who have a stronger connection with their home churches than the UCA, may express an interest in forming their own decision making body, but becoming a Presbytery would take a long time, if that is possible at all, in the given complex situation.

For the Asian background congregations, there are no other groups who have enough church numbers to consider becoming a Presbytery. Only a couple of Indonesian congregations showed their interest to be part of the Korean Commission but with very different reason. They see becoming part of the Commission as a refugee from whatever result of the coming Assembly Meeting regarding the ordination of same sex leaders in the church.

On political motivation of some Korean ministers to secure lifetime tenure in settlement, Son sees this as a core to the Korean Commission. However, regardless of the establishing of the Commission, some Korean congregations have already decided to have their minister as life tenure according to the Alternate Regulations for Korean Congregations and some others have followed the general five years term appointment. These placements were a matter for the local Presbyteries even before the birth of the Commission. As the Commission now has the power together with the Synod to approve the call and the term of appointment, the Commission has inducted three new Korean ministers in the short span of the life so far. Those three placements are in accordance with the general UCA regulations, five year term appointments. It is by and large the decision of the each congregation whether they would follow the Alternate Regulations or the general UCA regulations, not the Commission itself.

Within the Commission meetings, the ministers may influence on the discussion and on the decision making but the whole idea of having a Korean Commission is to maximize the participation of lay leaders. It would be true if it is the Council of Korean Churches which has been an ordained ministers’ meeting but the Commission is very different organisation from the Council which has now a much lesser role in the life of Korean congregations. (On 22 May 2005, at the Annual Meeting of the Council of Korean Churches it was decided to continue the Council as a largely minister’s fellowship group and assist those Korean congregations outside of the NSW Synod.) Except a number of Korean congregations, many of them now experience calling a new minister and there will be more changes in the future.

Son is also concerned that “Some Korean ministers argue that a Korean presbytery could help them ‘emancipate’ their congregations from the white people’s ‘imperialistic control’ over Koreans within ‘white peoples’ presbyteries”. (Son, 15) It would be good to provide a reference to make this statement which gives a strong impression that some Korean ministers are anti-‘white peoples’ presbytery’ and therefore anti-‘white peoples’ UCA’. This may be true to a certain extend, although it would not be as racial as Son implied. There is a number of UCA Korean ministers who do not want to use the UCA logo on their Order of Service sheet or on the name cards. This is mainly due to the Assembly debate on the ordination of same sex leaders rather than anything else.

However, if Son’s statement is true, the church in turn, should be able to ask why some Koreans see presbyteries as ‘white peoples’ presbytery’ and as ‘white peoples’ imperialistic control’, from where, what and why they want to ‘emancipate’ from. These may be painful questions to try to answer but are good theological questions the church should take seriously. Our church needs to approach this issue not from the position of a dominant center but from the position of marginal and powerless. It is true that our church has proclaimed ‘UCA is a multicultural church’ in 1985, but without enough theological reflection on ‘race and culture’ and ‘power and privilege’ in multicultural local context. Many congregations have been struggling to find out what it means to be a church that is a culturally and ethnically diverse in terms of sharing property, decision making, common mission to community, worshipping etc. If there are any minority groups which think UCA is a ‘white peoples’ church’, we as a church could not afford ignoring those voices but compassionately try to listen to what they have to say.

Son has also been criticizing the Korean churches for the authoritarian hierarchical structure. This criticism is something that many Korean ministers cannot avoid not only in Australian context but also in Korea itself. This is the very reason why the Korean Commission has come into being. They want to embrace and practice the ethos of UCA in their decision making collectively. It is not just the ministers’ Council of Korean Churches any more. Within the Korean Commission, lay and ordained, men and women, young and old, all come together to discern common mission of God. The Commission also is actually the first bi-lingual ‘presbytery’ in UCA. English speaking representatives from Presbyteries and the Synod freely make contribution to the life of Korean churches. It may not be perfect as it likes to be but it certainly has taken a significant step toward the ethos of UCA.

When there was fierce debate on the issue, a short paper called ‘The Ten Most Asked Questions about the establishing Korean Presbytery’ was published by Myong Duk Yang who worked as Cross-cultural Consultant at Board of Mission, the NSW Synod. This paper was nationally circulated by the Assembly Multicultural Ministry and attempted to answer to some of the hard questions asked.

1. Why have Korean churches expressed the desire to have their own Presbytery?

The way presbyteries work at the present time does not make it easy for Korean ministers and members of Korean congregations to participate. Many Korean ministers and lay people are not equipped with efficiency in English language to function and be able to contribute. Korean churches through the Council of Korean churches have already been trying to look at how they might more effectively develop and coordinate outreach and evangelism directed to Korean people in Australia. A Korean Presbytery with their own language and experience would be a good vehicle for mission planning, for education and resolving conflict, and may be able to better handle matters of pastoral oversight of congregations and ministers. A Korean Presbytery, it is envisaged, would be able to reach out to Korean congregations who at the present time feel the language and cultural obstacles are stopping them from being part of the UCA. It will be a ‘trial’ presbytery with more flexibility and creativity relating with other existing presbyteries.

2. Why do Korean churches want to be part of the Uniting Church?

There has been over 100 years of mission history between Korea and Australia and past missionary efforts helped plant the Gospel in Korea. There were even Korean congregations in the Presbyterian church prior to the coming into being of the Uniting Church. Sharing a common faith heritage, it is not surprising that many have found their home in the UCA. The fact that the Uniting Church is known as a multicultural church has also been a drawing factor. Many of the Korean ministers serving Korean congregations are going through the Reception of Ministers process and are deeply committed to serving and working within the UCA. Today, many Koreans migrating to Australia come from a Presbyterian or Methodist heritage, representing a mission opportunity and it would be hoped we can find ways to welcome them into our midst.

3. Would a Korean Presbytery alienate Korean churches from the wider church community?

No, in fact, this process could well help Korean churches feel more able to participate in the UCA and feel a greater sense of belonging and connection. At present, except for a very small number of ministers and lay people, there is little involvement in the life of Presbyteries and very few are involved in decision making beyond their own congregation. If Korean churches have their own Presbytery, they will be represented on Synod boards and committees, and be involved in inter Presbytery activities which would mean an increased visibility and contribution of Korean members to the wider church.

4.    Are Korean churches able to handle the pastoral and missional responsibilities of a Presbytery?

The present form of the Churches of Korean Council has already been doing some of this work over the last 10 years. Presbyteries and the NSW Synod frequently approach the Council for Korean Churches in an advisory capacity. No doubt Korean church leaders would have a lot to learn but with the support and help of the wider church and the guidance of the Holy Spirit it would not be impossible. It would be important to ensure that a presbytery minister and key office bearers serving a Korean presbytery are well-informed about processes within the Uniting Church.

5.    Would it give more power to Korean ministers?

The Korean Council at the moment is largely a decision-making body of ministers. If a presbytery is formed there would need to be the normal representation of lay and ordained participation and gender balance. Regular presbytery meeting will bring a better communication and sharing.

6.    Should all Korean churches belong to the Korean Presbytery?

No. If a Korean Presbytery is formed each Korean congregation would have the option to remain within the existing Presbytery or join the new Presbytery. Some will feel their ministry and mission is best furthered by remaining in their present presbytery. However, a Korean Presbytery could play a supportive role to Presbyteries that have Korean congregations. It would be helpful too for Korean congregations that join a Korean Presbytery to have some link with the regional presbytery, in ways that would still need to be determined; perhaps through the sharing of an annual gathering or/and report.

7.    If Koreans have their own Presbytery, would other ethnic groups also want to have their own?

Maybe, (but probably not). We should not assume that the needs identified by one community are the same for other communities. In terms of numbers, the Tongan community is about the same size however, for a number of reasons most Tongan churches are well integrated into existing presbyteries. Command of English does not appear to be as major a problem for all communities as it is for the Korean community.

8.    Would Korean Presbytery need more money to operate?

Not more or less than other Presbyteries. There is a need to have a full time mission officer but already there is a planned half time coordinator for the Korean Council. On the other hand, it would be responsibility of Korean churches to give their share to the Synod like other congregations.

9.    Are we failing Korean brothers and sisters, specially the second generation if we move in this direction?

Over the last years, the wider church has been assisting Korean churches in many ways; welcoming them into the life of the UCA; providing intensive courses for ministers; assisting financially and in finding church properties etc. It is now a sign of maturity that Korean congregations want to take up their responsibility to contribute more actively to building the future of our church. If we choose not to do anything we would be failing our Korean brothers and sisters, expecting them to remain frustrated and silent and thereby be closing ourselves off from the gifts they want to bring. It is true that those expressing the need for a Korean Presbytery are first generation migrants. It is unclear whether the next generation will continue to feel this need. A Korean presbytery may have a limited life. It should be reviewed every 5 years with a decision made as to whether it is still needed. There could well be great value in young people in a Korean presbytery being able to network together and share similar issues and needs.

10.  Wouldn’t the setting up of a Korean presbytery be a betrayal of our vision of being a multicultural church?

There are possibilities and risks; advantages and potential problems but initially for a trial period should we not be willing to take this new direction. This move may in fact manifest a mature stage of being a multicultural church, affirming our diversity, recognizing we have different needs and taking seriously our ethnic and linguistic diversity in the way we order our church’s life. Korean congregations want to be at the stage of mutual giving and receiving of the gifts given by God. Our unity will continue to be expressed through common worship and mission at different levels, in our common affirmation of the Basis of Union and shared way of being a church of pilgrims open to the new things the Spirit brings. Having heard the constraints that are being felt hindering full participation a multicultural church seeks to respond to the needs and create more flexible structures so that, in this instance, the gifts and talents of our Korean members can be made more fully available. This would not be a betrayal of our vision but a strategy to build a more inclusive and missional church.

On the issue of language and communication, some members of Korean Commission have expressed a feeling of ‘emancipation’ using their mother tongue at the meetings. Some of them finally have come out of silence and have found their words at decision making meetings in the UCA. As Pearson argues in his article ‘The Case for a Korean Presbytery: Using the language of our Heart’, “to find their voice, to say what it means for them to have come from another part of the world, to make their home inside the Uniting Church, to live in and between two or more languages”. (Pearson, 2003, 1)

Whether we use English or Korean, the language is a vehicle of communication and of expressing our heart to God and to one another. It is not so much the language itself is a barrier to us but it is more how we practice cross-cultural communication. As a multicultural church, we are not able to learn all the ethnic languages we neither have nor expect all of them to speak good English. Rather, our church needs to learn more of how to use interpretation and translation and how to use our non-verbal languages, and how to learn skills of cross-cultural communication. We should not be afraid to see intra-groups meeting with their own languages for them to have a safe place, but also encourage to meeting as an inter-group so that we can affirm the one body of Christ.

For some multicultural denominations outside the UCA, like Presbyterian Church of Aoteroa-New Zealand, learning a second language during the theological studies is a requirement for ministry candidates. UCA should be value more the work of bi-lingual leaders and cultural interpreters we have, and be more intentional for leaders and potential leaders to be better equipped as a bridge builder. In the 2001 National Church Life Survey, one of the areas of highly felt need in ministry formation has been the area of cross-cultural ministry. Among the 50% of UCA clergy in NSW congregational placement who answered the survey, 65% overall felt poorly or not at all equipped with cross-cultural ministry and 19% in basic outline, and only 10 % said that they are well prepared. (2001 National Church Life Survey: Unpublished paper)

Language and communication are mutual responsibility to make an effort in inclusive community rather than asking other small groups to be assimilated into the dominant culture and way of church administration.

Son is correct in saying that “the issues surrounding the ‘Korean Presbytery’ are not limited to Korean congregations in a multicultural ministry arena but impact upon the whole ‘pilgrim people’ under the Uniting Church banner.” (Son, 11) “Through the 10 years debate of ‘establishing a Korean Presbytery’ at Synod meetings, even representatives from rural area which do not seem have a relevance with a multicultural church had painfully become aware that they were part of the multicultural church community.” says Yang in 30 Years Korean Ministry in Australia (Yang, 2004, 487). Although it had been a difficult process, the debate created a positive opportunity for the church to talk about ‘what it means to belong to a multicultural church for me’. Furthermore, our church now humbly stands with the new cross-cultural development among us and see what the Holy Spirit does through the Korean Commission. The Korean Commission is not certainly a sign of doom of our vision for multicultural church but it is a manifestation of our faith and trust in God who will continue to work through the diversity and new ways.

4.         Towards a ‘Korean Presbytery’

There are a number of Korean congregations who chose not to belong to the Korean Commission and continued to be part of the local presbyteries. Korean congregations in other synods also relate to their own local presbyteries. Some are happy to stay that way and some Korean congregations have expressed the desire to be linked to the Commission.

The Korean Commission meets bilingually with some English-speaking representatives. It comprises eleven congregations and they are on the way to discover what it means to be a Commission and to be part of the UCA. At the moment, each congregation appoints four people as their representatives for the Korean Commission, which includes one minister and three lay members. Also, there are members from outside the Korean community including representatives from the Synod and the Presbyteries. Total membership is 59 at the time of a report to the Council of Synod in June 2005 (Jang, 2005).

The Standing Committee of the Commission has been the most active decision making body of the Commission. Members consist of lay and ordained, men and women, Koreans and non-Koreans. Although Korean women members have been absent in the Committee, there has been a balance of lay and ordained, Korean and non-Koreans. Meetings are often conducted bi-lingually with both English and Korean translations and so are the recordings of minutes for these meetings. In 2005, the Standing Committee approved and conducted three induction services and one recognition service.

The leaders of the Commission have been participating in different decision making Committees in the Synod. Their voice and contribution have been much visible and vocal. For example, at the Synod Mission Resource Fund consultation in 2005, for the first time the Korean Commission was represented and able to present a case and achieved significant funding for one of their member churches. There have been more positive signs of ‘coming closer’ to the UCA than ‘departing further’ from it, as some expressed a concern.

However, it is not all a perfect picture. While the Commission has developed a good relationship with the wider church, some internal relationships have been frustrating. Members have expressed a concern that much expected development of second-generation group has not been achieved to this date. There is also an issue of trust and respect among Korean ministers. There has been inevitable confusion about the roles and expectations for the office bearers.

The first Annual General Meeting of the Commission in August 2005 began with exciting reports from various leaders about mission activity but the meeting ended with bitter feelings expressed on the process of renewing terms of the office bearers. When UCA meeting procedures are mixed up with the practice of Korean culture, it creates inconsistency and confusion. Since there are also issues of power and status attached to the office positions, conflict is not uncommon during the election time. One young representative expressed at the Annual Meeting her disappointment with the process. Some lay members showed their discontent at the disunity within the Commission.

However, as the time goes on, the Commission becomes more confident in their mandate and clearer in the mutual role expectation. At the same time, after a round of leadership change, the Commission has been more focused on their mission and ministry for their member congregations.

In October 2007, there was a three year review on the Commission by the Synod. The report written by Review Committee appointed by the Synod, focused on three areas; how well the Commission has: functioned as a council of the church, fulfilling the responsibilities entrusted to it; assisted and equipped its member congregations and leaders for ministry and mission within the UCA and wider Australian context; and assisted its member congregations and leaders to be integrated into the life of the UCA. The finding of the Committee was positive. “The Review Committee believes the Commission is making good progress in educating its congregations and members in their understanding of Uniting Church ethos and procedures... and in equipping them for mission in an Australian context”(2007, 1). The Synod this time received the report and made a several resolution such as affirm members of Korean Commission for the competency with which the Commission has fulfilled its responsibilities, approved continuation of the Korean Commission in its present form for a further four years, request the Council of Synod to conduct a consultation with the Commission in 2010/11 to consider the possibility of the Commission taking on the remaining responsibilities of a Presbytery (The Synod Meeting, 2007, 196/07S). The Synod also recommended that the Commission works with the United Theological College to ensure the process.

It looks that the Synod gives an opportunity to the Commission to become a Presbytery in the future, given the Commission work with the College in terms of equipping Korean candidates and of providing field education opportunities for Korean and non-Korean candidates in Commission congregations. This is a remarkable development to see a change of mind of the Synod in relation with a minority ethnic group. The multicultural Uniting Church has been finding another meaning of what multicultural church entails.

5.         First non-geographic Korean Presbytery

On December 11, 2011, a multicultural milestone in the Uniting Church was set. The inauguration of the Synod’s Korean Presbytery was finally happened. In the words of the Moderator, the Rev. Dr Brian Brown, “an extremely important occasion in the life of the Uniting Church”.

Dr Brown preached on “Our Mutual Authority Under Christ”, saying that because trust had prevailed Korean and non-Korean members of the church could say they were “in this together as equals”.

He said, “The step we take together today is in fact the final long stride in a journey that has taken over ten years to complete. And what a joyful step it is!

“Joy is what we feel when a vision becomes a reality.

“Joy is what we feel when hard, committed work bears its fruit.

“Joy is what we feel when we celebrate what it means to be a truly multicultural church.”

He said as he read again the Uniting Church statement about being a multicultural church, certain sentences stood out:

·         A multicultural church encourages people from different ethnic backgrounds to take up their life in the church and contribute to that life

·         A multicultural church develops policies and processes to assist the full participation of all its members

·         A multicultural church reflects equality and partnership in sharing the resources God has given.

“So, today we celebrate an occasion when what we say with the best of intentions equates with what we do in practice.”

He said the new presbytery would face many challenges that would test both faith and patience.

“One of those challenges arises from the fact that some come with a strong traditional cultural ethos. This may vary at some points or to some extent from the ethos of the Uniting Church that flows from the founding denominations and has continued to be formed in the crucible of a sometimes turbulent national and global community over the last 34 years.

“There are and will be points of tension that will have to be faced and dealt with.

“In some things you may be assertive; in others you may decide to submit to the process of change.”

Two things would guide the presbytery, he said. One was the authority of Jesus Christ. The other was the trust that underpinned relationships in the Uniting Church in Australia, “a church of which we are justly proud, and whose ethos we highly value”.

Dr Brown said, “Be positive about the church of which we are a part. We have the strongest possible foundation in Jesus Christ.

“We have a sound ethos built on the recognition that we are called to love both God and our neighbour, so our spirituality embraces the call to compassion and justice for all people.”

He said, “We are witness to significant and exciting fresh expressions of mission in the life of our church, clearly obvious in the growth of some of our migrant-ethnic congregations.

“Yes there are areas of struggle and challenge but nothing that cannot be endured and transformed if we are willing to follow God, walk with Jesus, be led by the Spirit, and trust one another on new and risky paths.” (Insights, 19 Feb, 2012)

When the Synod Meeting was held in September 2011, seven years work of Korean Commission was evaluated and generally received as positive.

REPORT FROM THE KOREAN PRESBYTERY

The Korean Presbytery had begun in unique circumstances, and had been expected to cover a variety of roles as a Presbytery and also roles beyond that of a Presbytery: being a model of a multicultural Uniting Church and its relating church policy, administration, education and ministry.

In these roles, the Korean Presbytery has encouraged Korean congregations to participate and to be involved in things of the wider Uniting Church community whenever possible. These expectations for the Korean Presbytery will continue to be placed upon the Korean Presbytery as long as it exists.

The Korean Presbytery has continually helped the Korean congregation ministers and the congregations in Korean Presbytery, other Presbyteries and other Synods for their placement calling processes, settling in their Presbyteries and the UCA body for the first time, regular face to face conversations, telephone and email contacts. We have also tried to keep our connections through various ways with the Korean ministers working in the English speaking congregations in the NSW-ACT Synod.

There has been marvelous and vital progress, growth in the number of members, activities, which are blessed and joyful things, and challenges.

I. FINDINGS ON BODY, MINISTRY, EDUCATION AND MISSION

1. Growing Membership.

 Korean Presbytery has continued its growth in numbers of congregations, members and committees for various activities. We are still being approached by other Korean churches in Sydney and other cities within our Synod. We have guidelines to accept new churches, including information sessions for the history, polity & ethos, church structure, brief UCA theology, and requesting them to participate in the Korean Presbytery meeting twice for their/our understanding about each other, before the final decision is made. We are at the moment having a conversation with four Korean churches. They are not members of the UCA at the moment. The Korean Presbytery has eight committees, including two newly established committees since the Korean Presbytery has begun, like the Candidate Ministerial Committee and the Minister Stipend Support Committee.

2. Increased involvement and understanding of the UCA.

The Korean Presbytery is now well on its way to becoming a well-integrated body of the UCA. The Korean Presbytery appoints members for their increased involvement in any committee and working group in the Synod and Assembly whenever invited, and the representatives of those committees reports back to the Korean Presbytery about their experiences and reflection. I found that their reports to the Korean Presbytery for their reflection also help the other members to be more familiar with the situation of the UCA as members. We would like to express through this report a special thank to Rev Dr Dean Drayton for his leading about the Basis of Union for years. Rev Dr Dean Drayton explained the meaning of the Basis of Union for each number for twenty minutes before we move to our meeting agenda.

3. Continuing participation in the meeting, events of the Korean Presbytery.

 Korean congregations and members of our Presbytery have well supported and participated in the meetings and events initiated and organized by the Korean Presbytery. One of the thankful things we experienced is that the youth and young adults have shown their willingness to be active in participation and leadership when events for them were opened. It is thankful that youths from each congregation have had gatherings initiated by the 2nd generation committee of the Korean Presbytery for prayers for their own congregations, Korean Presbytery and the UCA.

4. Strong attendance in the Presbytery meetings by lay members.

 There are 4 regular meetings of the Presbytery: in February, May, August and

 November of every year. Each congregation appoints 4 members for the Presbytery, Consisting of 1 minister and 3 lay members. We normally have 40 to 50 members in every meeting, which means that we have more lay members than ministers, including young adult members.

5. Commitments in mission: rural and indigenous ministry and North Korea.

 Generally Korean congregations have had strong commitments in mission and evangelism. Most of the congregations have connections with the mission fields. The Korean Presbytery and its congregations have continually had conversations with the UME for rural ministry and the UAICC NSW. Our Presbytery has decided that we would be fundraising mission funds for mission in rural and indigenous community in Passion Week, and gifts for children in the Ra Sun orphanage house in North Korea through the Uniting World. It is thankful that all Korean congregations of the Korean Presbytery generously participated in our fundraising event in 2012 to support Camden Theological Library of the UTC in order to bring more Korean books to the people.

6. Website.

 We recently established a Website for the Korean Presbytery with the support of the SMRF. We are going to use the Website in order to promote and inform the Korean Presbytery and the UCA. It includes any information about the UCA including regulations, policies and materials helpful to the Korean congregations and its members. Our website is already opened, but still on the process of updating. The Website address is www.koreanchurchuca.org . At the moment, most of the information is written in Korean, but will be changed into Korean & English.

7. Intensive education sessions and workshops.

 We irregularly arrange education sessions for ministers and lay leaders. We have encouraged all ministers in the Korean Presbytery to take courses on Misconduct Sexuality, Safe Church Workshop. We are especially aware that all paid people including ministers, people in youth ministry and any lay persons in the congregation needs to take the workshop for the Safe church workshop as compulsory, while other volunteers for children in the congregations and organizations in the UCA are recommended to take the workshop. We already had workshops for the ministers. The workshops for the volunteers relating with children will be arranged. Many thanks to Ms Emma Parr in the UME.

8. Invite agencies of the NSW-ACT Synod for sharing and reporting to the Presbytery

 Meeting. We sometimes invite people working in Synod agencies for greetings and to also speak about their ministries. We cannot invite them to every meeting, but we will continually invite them to visit our Presbytery to broaden our understanding of the UCA.

9. Cooperation with other Presbyteries.

 Korean Presbytery has members from all 5 Presbyteries within the Sydney area. They have shared experiences in their Presbyteries, when we had to ask them about dealing with certain issues within the Presbytery. We still continually post out our meeting minutes. We also experienced the support and openness of the Presbyteries towards the Korean Presbytery and congregations in relation to property usage for worship and mission. We also contact leaders in other Presbyteries in order to hear their advice and suggestion on specific issues.

II. CHALLENGES

1. Property.

 Some Korean congregations have to start their worship and mission without any property and worship spaces. It means that Korean congregations, as the minority group, have relied on the generosity and hospitality of the English speaking congregations. We really express our deep thanks to our friends, English speaking congregations, Presbyteries, the Synod and the Assembly for their endless endeavor and support. Nevertheless, it is true that we are still seeking worship spaces for more Korean congregations. Seeking worship space is not just for the benefit of Korean congregations, but also gives everyone further chances to share and cooperate within our relationship and responsibilities.

2. Limited resources for continuing education programs for ministers and lay leaders.

 The past years have seen the limitation of resources for Korean congregation

 ministers and lay leaders for their continuing education. This is one of the most serious issues the Korean Presbytery faces. We wish the UME and UTC consider how they could help ethnic congregations beyond the Korean congregations within the Synod for continuing education programs.

3. Needed resources for Sunday schools and youth.

 All of the congregations within the Korean Presbytery have Sunday schools, youth gatherings, and young adult worship and bible studies. To the present, each congregation have used materials for their gathering relying on their Sunday school teachers and leaders. We do not know what organization within the UCA we need to contact or to consult for education resources. This issue has been raised as critical by the Sunday school community in the Korean congregations, but we have not been able to sufficiently deal with this issue.

4. Financial difficulties.

 Unlike other presbyteries, the Korean Presbytery have started their role and

 responsibilities as a Presbytery without any assets and funds. That’s why the Korean Presbytery could employ a paid staff for the Korean Presbytery with the synod’s Presbytery Grant. In relation to the financial concern, we are also aware of the Synod’s potentially major financial difficulties in the next few years. We are also aware of the potential decline in ongoing budget allocations within the Synod. Nevertheless, it is a realistic fact that any decision in this coming Synod 2013 will impact to the ministry, mission, and

activities of the Korean Presbytery. (C7.17.1-4)

Although there was some discussion as to whether the Synod was fully convinced to approve a presbytery for a group who felt they had been alienated from the wider community, the Synod finally agreed to the motion.

Resolution for the Korean Commission

That Synod:

1. Receive the report.
2. In accordance with Regulation 3.5.12(b) resolve to form a Korean Presbytery within the bounds of the Synod, with all the powers and responsibilities of a Presbytery, and with these provisions:

(a)     that the date of inauguration of the Korean Presbytery and the name of the Korean Presbytery will be determined by the Synod Standing Committee no later than February 2012;

(b)     that all Korean congregations and faith communities within the Synod which are currently part of the Korean Commission will join the Korean Presbytery, unless they choose otherwise ;

(c)     that any Korean congregation or faith community can decide with at least 3 months’ notice to vary their previous decision regarding joining or not joining the Korean Presbytery;

(d)     that the membership of the Korean Presbytery will be in accordance with the Regulations plus additional members comprising:

·         the General Secretary of the Synod or his/her nominee

·         the Principal of United Theological College or his/her nominee;

·         two persons appointed by Uniting Mission and Education one person appointed by each other presbytery in whose geographical bounds there are present one or more Korean congregations or faith communities which are part of the Korean Presbytery;

·         three Koreans in specified ministries trained in recognised colleges of the Uniting Church, appointed by the Synod Standing Committee;

·         additional lay members under Regulation 3.4.15(d)(ii) to provide for each Korean Congregation to appoint up to four representatives to Presbytery in order to include at least one woman and at least one person under 40 years of age in their Presbytery representation;

·             and authorise the Synod Standing Committee to seek Assembly approval if needed for the above membership provisions;

(e)   that Synod funding will be provided to the Korean Presbytery from the date of its inauguration consistent with the funding provisions made for other presbyteries within the Synod .

3. Recommend that the Korean Presbytery continues the practice of the Korean Commission in operating in both Korean and English languages at Presbytery meetings and Presbytery Standing Committee meetings.
4. Recommend that the Korean Presbytery maintain the practice of the Korean Commission in establishing a Second Generation Committee.
5. Resolve to review no later than 2017 the ongoing need for the Korean Presbytery.
6. Continue the Korean Commission as constituted and functioning at present until the date of inauguration of the Korean Presbytery.
7. Remind each Presbytery of the availability of the Cross-culturalism  relationships Workshops that are now in the hands of the Assembly.

   8.  Take steps to ensure that a regular section of insights be published in the       Korean Language.

   9.  Encourage the English-speaking Presbyteries to undertake to learn about the Korean churches and develop meaningful relationships with Korean members of the church.

6. Emerging uncertainty in the Future

In the 2013, the tales on Korean presbytery has been unfolded again to an uncertainty. Financial crisis of the Synod in general hits the Korean presbytery as well. The support has been cut down to 50%. It means that the presbytery could only approve half time placement for presbytery staff from 2014. Since the role of paid Executive Secretary has been crucial for the presbytery, relating member congregations and the wider churches, this cut would bring a limitation to its future activity.

In fact, a crisis within the Presbytery has emerged around the reduction of the placement and appointment of the staff. Consultation on the future of the Presbytery was carried out. At the regular presbytery meeting in November 2013, the term of Presbytery staff Executive Secretary was a major agenda. The Secretary had served for 10 years from the time of Korean Commission and he was seeking an extension. However up to the point, there has been much tension and conflict among ministers on the issue. The first issue on reduction of placement from a full time to less than half time position since the cutting of the fund from the Synod provided not much option to the presbytery leaders. But the second issue on whether there should be a new mandate and direction for the presbytery contained many implications including staffing.

Some ministers held an opinion to approve the extension of his term saying that the Presbytery continued in need of his experience and ability in the Synod.

On the other side, others argued that his term should not be extended and finding a new person who would serve the changing situation of Presbytery. The division of two groups became deep on the issue, there was a serious communication breakdown which emerged to surface during the presbytery meeting.

At the meeting, emotional debate continued from both sides. Lay members also began to engage in the debate, usually supported their congregation minister’s side. The presbytery experienced intense turbulence over the agenda. Representatives from the Synod and the Assembly were also present at the meeting. After the meeting, one of the representatives expressed that he has never seen a presbytery meeting like this and could not understand why the Synod representatives did not interfere and rendered some assistance. Trust among the members of Presbytery was seriously tested.

The Presbytery finally agreed on not reappointing the current Secretary but to form a selection committee to find a new staff on the based on the budget available that is 40-50% placement.

Furthermore some outside element of the Presbytery has been reinforcing the uncertainty of the Presbytery’s future. Within the Synod, there has been a discussion on structural reform on ‘one Synod, one Presbytery’. If this picture comes into reality in anyway, the place of Korean presbytery in the Synod will also be a matter of debate. The future of Korean Presbytery is much depended upon the changing priority of wider church and the debate on the need and effectiveness of the mono-ethnic Presbytery will not only be continued but would also be inevitable.

<Bibliography>

Jang KS, ‘Report to the Council of Synod on the Korean Churches’, June, 2005.

“Our Mutual Authority Under Christ”, Insights, 19 Feb, 2012.

Pearson C, ‘The Case for a Korean Presbytery: Using the language of our Heart’, Unpublished Paper, 2003, 1.

‘Resolution for the Korean Commission’, C7.17.1-4, The NSW Synod, 2011.

‘Review Committee Report on the Korean Commission’, The Synod Meeting, 2007, 196/07S.

Son YR, ‘Korean Commission: Womb of Mono-Ethnic Presbyteries and Doom of the Uniting Church’s Vision for a Multicultural Church’, Uniting Church Studies, Vol.10, No. 2, August  2004, 11-21.

The NSW Synod Report on the Korean Commission, C7.17.1-4, 2011.

The Assembly Multicultural Ministry Committee Minutes, 27/2-2/3, 2005.

Yang MD, ‘The Ten Most Asked Questions about the establishing Korean Presbytery’, Board of Mission, the NSW Synod, 2003.

Copyright Myong Duk Yang