by A. Sung Park
A. Sung Park is Assistant Professor of Theology and Korean Studies at the School of Theology, Claremont, CA 91711. He is currently writing a book on Minjung theology.
The following article appeared in Process Studies, pp. 118-126, Vol.17, Number 2, Summer 1988. Process Studies is published quarterly by the Center for Process Studies, 1325 N. College Ave., Claremont, CA 91711. Used by permission. This material was prepared for Religion Online by Ted and Winnie Brock.
The author examines the hermeneutics of process and Minjung theologies by comparing their major problems, goals, and methodologies. Minjung theology is concerned with Han — the compressed feeling of suffering caused by injustice and oppression. Han helps us understand the necessity of active involvement in the world for maximizing the intensity of experience.
Hermeneutics means interpretation. There are two ways to define the term "hermeneutics." In a narrow sense, hermeneutics means the analytic methods for the exegesis of any text, especially when interpreting an ancient or classical document for our life situation. In a broad sense, it denotes the understanding and interpretation of our life in content as well as method (Heidegger). According to Paul Ricoeur, Nietzsche "had the insight that philosophy, as philosophy of culture, was a hermeneutics, an analysis of significations" (PPR 216).
In this paper, I will discuss the broad sense of the hermeneutics of Minjung and process theology by analyzing and comparing their theological significance. I will focus on the problem, the solution, and the hermeneutical methodologies of Minjung and process theology.
I. Major Problem
In traditional theology, the notion of sin is the central way of understanding problems in the world. Sin is construed as an obstacle in the way of salvation. But both Process and Minjung theologies think differently from traditional theology on the matter of sin. In process theology, the concept of the traditional doctrine of sin receives no attention. In lieu of the doctrine of sin, it speaks of a doctrine of evil.
For Whitehead, God’s primordial nature lures every actual entity to actualize its full potentials. Every actual entity aims at "intensity of sensitive experience" (PR 16/25). The process of the elimination of feeling proceeds until the concrete unity of feeling is attained. The final unity, called the "satisfaction," is where value, the aim of every actual entity, is obtained (PR 211-212/322). God’s goal in the world is the attainment of value (RM 97). God lures us to the maximization of enjoyment for attaining value from every actual occasion of experience (PT 75). In response to God’s initial aim, we choose our own way with self-determination. When we fail to respond to the lure of God’s initial aim, we are involved in evil. To Whitehead, "evil is exhibited in physical suffering, mental suffering, and loss of the higher experience in favor of the lower experience" (RM 92). We should avoid the two sorts of the experience of evil -- discord and triviality (PT 71). Triviality means to avoid the risk of suffering. When people choose an insignificant way of existence in order to reduce the possibility of suffering, they fall into triviality.
The other form of evil is discord. To understand discord, we need to know "inhibition," which has two meanings: one is "complete inhibition," "an example of the fitness of subjective form" (AI 256). Whitehead calls it "anesthesia." The other "involves a derogation from perfection." The latter is "aesthetic destruction," "the feeling of evil in the most general sense, namely physical pain or mental evil, such as sorrow, horror, dislike" (AI 256). The subjective experience of aesthetic destruction is discord (AI 256). Discord inheres in the destruction of "harmony" and produces frustration. Discord derives from the incompatibility of diverse modes of "beauty." Whitehead says, "The Discord in the Universe arises from the fact that modes of Beauty are various, and not of necessity compatible" (AI 266).
In its relation to beauty and to the notion of perfection, discord may be explained more clearly. For Whitehead, ‘The more intense the discordant feeling, the farther the retreat from perfection" (AI 256). Discord can be expressed in two ways: "Discord may take the form of freshness and hope, or it may be horror or pain" (AI 266). Discord is, however, a necessary element in the transition from one mode to another. Without it, progress is not possible: "Progress is founded upon the experience of discordant feelings" (AI 257). Thus, discord which is intrinsically evil and destructive, contributes to beauty by shifting an aim "from the tameness of out worn perfection to some other ideal with its freshness still upon it" (AI 257). Therefore, it is valuable in terms of its bestowment to "the merits of Imperfection" (AI 257).
For Minjung theology, the major problem is Han. The Minjung are the down-trodden whose unmistakable sign is Han-brooding. Han is the compressed feeling of suffering caused by injustice and oppression, a complex feeling of resentment and helplessness, anger and lamentation.
The Kwangju massacre in 1980 will illustrate Han. In Kwangju, the fourth largest city of Korea, thousands of people were demonstrating for the release of Dae Jung Kim, a prominent opposition leader, and the democratization of Korea. Chun’s regime sent paratroopers to subdue the demonstration. Their violent suppression escalated violence; over two thousand citizens were murdered. The silent streets of Kwangju were full of Han after the massacre. Han is a wailing cry against incredible injustice in silence. Han is the abyss of grief which has been imbedded in the collective unconscious history of the Korean Minjung for ages. As the Buddhist poet, Ko Eun, states, "We Koreans were born from the womb of Han and brought up in it" (MT 54). Numerous foreign invasions, the iron rule of tyrants, and the exploitation by the rich have caused the Han of the Minjung. Women, particularly, having experienced the long-suffering of dehumanizing patriarchy, envelop much sharper and deeper Han than do men.
Han is potential energy, an active volcano of indignation and agony. Depending on how it is unraveled, Han may turn out to be creative energy for revolution or may explode destructively to seek revenge and killing.
Han is a complex, dynamic feeling which cannot be neatly analyzed or dichotomized. To facilitate an explanation of its depth, it may be divided into two dimensions: personal and collective. Each dimension has two levels: conscious and unconscious. At its personal conscious level, Han takes the form of anger, helplessness, deep mourning, and resentment. At its personal unconscious level, Han is buried in deep anguish and bitterness.
At its collective conscious level, Han is demonstrated through collective wrath, rage, street demonstrations, and rebellion. At its collective unconscious level, Han is submerged in the deep silence of racial lamentation. Social injustice, political oppression, economic exploitation and foreign invasions produce collective Han. Han is transmittable. When the Minjung experience suffering over many generations, they develop unconscious collective Han and transmit it to their posterity.
No established Christian theology has focussed the problem of Han. Since World War II, most contemporary theologies have stressed the graveness of sin. Reinhold Niebuhr depicts "man as sinner" asserting that the heart of sin is pride and sensuality. For Barth, sin is rebellion against God and its marks are sloth, falsehood, disobedience, and unbelief. For Tillich, sin is estrangement, the manifestations of which are unbelief, hubris, and concupiscence. Latin American liberation theologians, criticizing the existential and individualistic understanding of sin found in traditional theology, stress the historical, social, and economic dimensions of sin. Unlike any of these approaches Minjung theologians take the problem of Han as its major theme. It does not mean that Minjung theology depreciates the doctrine of sin. Rather Minjung theology intends to complement the doctrine of sin by developing the notion of Han.
While sin is an offense against God and neighbor, Han is the painful experience of the victim of sin. Sin is the act of the oppressor and Han is the suffering of the victim. Sin belongs to the oppressor; Han belongs to the downtrodden. No one, however, is free from sin. The downtrodden may commit sin, causing Han for others. Sin may be absolved by confession and repentance. Han cannot be disintegrated by repentance. It takes a long period of healing following resolution of the original harm.
The traditional doctrine of sin has left out the pain of the victim. Feminist theology has become aware of this one-sided doctrine of sin. Especially, the male-centered understanding of sin, such as pride and self-centeredness, was unacceptable to feminist theologians. For them, sin is more like the lack of self assertion and pride, diffuseness, and low self-esteem (WR 37).
Han is basically a women’s term. The existence of women itself is Han (MT 54). The Minjung Han of women is more intense than any other because of the double bind of women in patriarchal and hierarchical culture. Traditional folk songs and folk tales are full of the Minjung Han of women.
Minjung theology affirms that theology should not be satisfied with solving the problem of sin but should snuggle with resolving the Minjung’s Han. The doctrine of sin must include the problem of Han. Without dealing with the problem of Han, the doctrine of sin would be preoccupied with the salvation of the oppressors only. Minjung theology intends to counterbalance the oppressor-centered concept of sin and salvation by exploring the problem of Han.
1. Han and evil in the form of discord are quite similar. Discord abides with the destruction of harmony and generates physical and mental evil such as sorrow, horror, and dislike. Discord -- in itself destructive and evil -- has the positive dimension which brings forth freshness. Han, the boiled-down feeling of sorrow and anger, yields physical and mental sufferings. It is destructive in itself, yet has a positive aspect.
While Han as potential energy can be used for either a destructive rampage of vengeance or the constructive power of revolution, discord as evil can be horror and pain or it can take the form of hope and freshness. Both Han and discord become either creative or destructive. In other words, discord is intrinsically evil but may be instrumentally either good or bad. Han is also intrinsically destructive, but can be instrumentally used for good or bad. In terms of their intrinsic and instrumental values, Han and discord are resemblant.
2. In Minjung theology, sin produces Han. In process theology, our failure to respond to God’s initial aim engenders evil. For process theology, our resistance to God’s luring corresponds to the concept of sin. Nevertheless, both Minjung and process theologies set aside the doctrine of sin, underscoring Han and evil as problems in their systems. Minjung theology, however, does not devaluate the significance of sin in the scheme of salvation, for sin causes the Han of the oppressed. On the other hand, process theology has not grappled with the problem of sin. It states that discord as evil simply arises from the incompatibility of diverse modes of beauty. While Minjung theology recognizes the gravity of sin, process theology de-emphasizes the seriousness of sin in the process of progress. Both theologies need to work on the idea of sin, which we cannot afford to leave to traditional theology. Minjung theology must delve into the intriguing relations between sin and Han, and process theology needs to elaborate on the structural analysis of self-determination, which tends to resist God’s initial aim.
3. Han is caused when one’s own actualization of potentials is obstructed. Discord as evil takes place when the maximization of enjoyment is prevented. Both Han and discord cause suffering and horror. But, the experience of Han is quite different from that of discord. Whereas Han is the particular mode of the experience of the oppressed, discord is the universal mode of the experience of the oppressors and the oppressed. For Whitehead, the oppressors and the oppressed experience discord as a necessary factor for their growth.
Considering this notion of evil, one may wonder whether Whitehead fully grasped the darkness of evil in the world. His idea of evil is insufficient to embrace the deep misery and suffering of the oppressed. What we find in the heart of the victims of the Kwangju uprising is not the evil of discord which is a necessary factor for growth, but the inexpressible Han which cries out for justice. Women’s long-suffering experience is not particularly expressed in evil. Han epitomizes the silent suffering of women through the ages. Han is the depth of human agony whose dimensions include collective and unconscious worlds. Han is so deep that it may be inheritable. I believe that the experience of the evil of the downtrodden differs from that of the oppressors. If process theology aims at maximizing the intensity of the experience of people, it has to analyze the depth of human suffering, especially the ineffable pain of the downtrodden and women in the Third World, treating their experience of evil separate from the experience of the evil of the oppressors.
4. Discord is a necessary element in the transition from mode to mode. Since discord is an indispensable precondition for beauty, it takes an ontological seat in the path of progress. Han is not, however, a necessary element for the advancement of civilization. It is a transient reality which should eventually be overcome. On the other hand, Whitehead considers the evil of discord almost ultimate. Without the evil of discord, there will be no progress. For him, the end of progress is much worse than the end of the evil of discord. Upon considering the endless juxtaposed adventures of the evil of discord and beauty, I wonder whether Whitehead’s idea of the eschaton should be understood from a dualistic perspective.
For Minjung theology, salvation means creating Hanless society. To resolve the conscious dimension of Han, we must transform Han-causing personal or social problems, using Han as the basic energy. To unravel the unconscious level of Han, we have to transcend our deep-seated Han by participating in the process of transforming Han-causing problems.
In lieu of "utopia," Nam Dong Suh uses the biblical symbol, "millennium" (Rev. 20:2). A millennium is the positive side of Hanless society. Minjung theology prefers the symbol of the millennium to the symbol of the Kingdom of God. According to Suh:
"While the Kingdom of God is a heavenly and ultimate symbol, the Millennium is a historical, earthly and semi-ultimate symbol. Accordingly the Kingdom of God is understood as the place the believer enters when he dies, but the Millennium is understood as the point at which history and human society are renewed. Therefore in the Kingdom of God the salvation of individual person is secured, but in the Millennium is secured the salvation of the whole social reality of humankind." (MT 163)
In Korea, this millennium means an egalitarian society free from patriarchy and hierarchy, a self-determining country beyond foreign intervention, a reunified country beyond the division, and a democratic society beyond northern totalitarianism and southern authoritarianism. This is the state where everyone seeks to promote community-actualization beyond self-centered actualization. Here, an individual actualizes his or her potentials through helping others to actualize their potentials.
Minjung theologians believe that the Minjung are destined to be the subjects of their own history. Yong Bock Kim declares, "Kingdoms, dynasties and states rise and fall; but the Minjung remain as a concrete reality in history, experiencing the comings and goings of political powers" (MT 185). In the millennium, the Minjung will be the protagonists of their own destiny.
For Whitehead, God’s purpose in an actual entity is the attainment of the maximum of value in the world (RM 97). For his idea of historical goal, we need to mention four qualities -- Truth, Beauty, Adventure, and Art. They are essential for civilization. They need, however, a final quality, "a Harmony of Harmonies" or "Peace" which binds all four qualities. Apart from Peace, the pursuit of the four qualities can be ruthless, troublesome, and cruel (AI 284). This Peace drives out the ruthless egotism from our notion of civilization and is self-control "at the width where the ‘self has been lost, and interest has been transferred to coordinations wider than personality" (AI 285). The quality of civilization where Peace is united with Truth, Beauty, Adventure, and Art is comparable with the millennium of Minjung theology. One difference is that while peace which binds these four qualities should not be sought, the millennium of the Minjung must be striven for by the Minjung. To Whitehead, the experience of Peace is beyond our control: it arrives as a gift. The deliberate pursuit for Peace may pass into anesthesia (AI 285). Consequently, the goal of history is not to reach the Harmony of Harmonies. Instead, "The teleology of the Universe is directed to the production of Beauty" (AI 285). Beauty is the internal incorporation of the diversities of experience for the yield of maximum effectiveness. Although the completion of civilization comes through Peace, it never consummates history because there are always "the dream of youth" and "the Adventure of the Universe starts with the dream" (AI 296). For Whitehead, the Harmony of Harmonies in unity with the four other qualities in civilization is most ideal; yet that should not be the goal of the Universe. Adventure in search of the new perfection of Beauty is the purpose of civilization.
Cobb’s process theology follows Whitehead in virtually identifying the eschaton with God (PTPT 78). In Pannenberg’s eschatology, the Kingdom of God, where the general resurrection takes place, is the destiny of history. To Teilhard de Chardin, God, the centre of centres, coincides with the Omega Point toward which all histories are converging. The Omega Point is his final vision of history (PTPT 78). Pannenberg and Teilhard espouse a closed end of history, while process theology, based on Whitehead’s notion of freedom, reevaluates "the Christian interpretation of history without presupposing a fulfilling End" (PTPT 144). This belief in the radical openness of the eschaton is one of the great contributions which process theology makes to Christianity. With a consistent view of human freedom and an honest, self-critical attitude, process theology successfully resists the trap of the pre-determinism of history, envisioning an open end of history.
The millennium is congenial with the dynamics of the civilization of the balanced unity of the five qualities. Both of them affirm the community-actualization and the exclusion of restless egotism.
There is a difference too. Whereas Minjung theology literally seeks the establishment of the millennium, process theology does not pursue the quality of Peace because of its nature as a gift. The author sees some shortcomings in both approaches.
To eschew the abstractiveness of the symbol of God’s kingdom, Minjung theology consciously selects the symbol of the millennium, which is more historical and achievable. By fusing the symbolic reality of the biblical millennium with the sign of historical achievement, Minjung theology, however, makes a mistake of turning the millennium into a historical idol. Even though the historical fulfillment of the millennium should be sought, the millennium is not our possession but a hope for us.
For process theology, the notion of a new perfection through Adventure articulates the symbolic reality of the eschaton well. By almost identifying the eschaton with God, process theology avoids the confusion of the eschaton of history with the perfection of history; for God is "the Adventure of the Universe." Nevertheless, process theology is weak in terms of abstaining from the pursuit of peace. For Whitehead does not strive for Peace because it is a gift. Thus, his philosophical system makes little efforts to establish God’s kingdom on earth. Why can’t we seek the peace that saves civilization from its ruthless egotism? Why can’t we pursue the quality that binds Truth, Beauty, Adventure, and Art together? Even though we may not bring perfect Peace or may be in danger of falling into anesthesia, we cannot afford not to pursue the peace that brings the wholeness of civilization. Peace cannot be our possession but must be the ideal goal of our efforts.
Minjung theology upholds a closed view of the end of history by asserting the coming millennium in which the Minjung will be the subjects of their own history. But there is a chance that the Minjung may fail to achieve their historical call. Even after attaining self-determination in history, the Minjung have no guarantee that they will not turn out to be as oppressive as their oppressors. The millennium for which the Minjung strive is not a predetermined destiny of the Minjung in history. Without knowing the insecurity of freedom, the Minjung may fail to realize their historical vocation to establish the millennium on earth.
On the other hand, process theology affirms the unpredictability of the future, due to the adventure of freedom. Its coherent understanding of divine and human freedom provides one of the most rational views for the doctrine of the eschaton. The traditional idea of the eschaton holds that the fulfillment of history converges on the culmination of history. Process theology successfully defends the diverse possibilities of the historical eschaton, making room for divine and human freedom.
III. Hermeneutical Methodology
I use the term "hermeneutic" in the sense which incorporates various methodologies to achieve a certain goal for a system. For John Cobb, "Process theology has understood its responsibility more as that of clarifying what a Christian in the modern world should affirm and of guiding the church toward appropriated formulations of its faith" (PTPT 45). Even though he further acknowledges the use of biblical hermeneutics as necessary, he insists that process hermeneutics should not be limited to the Bible (PTPT 45).
Process hermeneutics starts from Whitehead’s organic philosophy. For Whitehead, God aims at realizing the maximum of value in all actual entities. These entities are guided by the subjective aim whose source is God. God uses the power of persuasion rather than coercion, luring the actual entity to the subjective aim (AI 166). Thus, persuasion is God’s methodology for the transformation of the world.
Process theology is, also, committed to the promotion of the enrichment of experience in the world. To achieve this, process hermeneutics seeks to "remove unnecessary external constraints upon the rational self-direction of conduct . . . . These unnecessary constraints do not operate chiefly upon the rich and powerful but upon the poor and oppressed" (PTPT 148). It has underscored "growth in truth" through "interchange with those whose experience and understanding are different from ours" (PTPT 61). The strength of process theology lies in its openness to truth, its appreciation for the diversity of various communities, and its self-critical ability in interaction with other groups. Open to new ideas and willing to change and to grow, this hermeneutics has the virtue of exercising the hermeneutics of suspicion on itself. Thus, we may say that process hermeneutics begins with Whitehead’s philosophy, commits itself to increasing the enrichment of experience of all, and follows its own direction of the commitment by promoting mutual growth in its interaction with other groups.
On the other hand, Minjung hermeneutics employs diverse sets of tools, including biblical hermeneutical methods. It, however, capitalizes upon other socio-cultural and political methods to achieve the goal of Minjung theology.
Byung Mu Ahn’s biblical hermeneutics is a socio-redactional criticism which explores the identity of Jesus and the Ochlos, the biblical Minjung in the gospel of Mark. In his studies, he concludes that Jesus and the Ochlos are inseparable in their identity. To know Jesus is to know the Ochlos. Thus, to serve Jesus is to serve the Minjung with whom Jesus completely identified.
Nam Dong Suh develops storytelling, socio-economic, and pneumatological methods. The storytelling method regards story as revelation. For Pannenberg, revelation is history. For Suh, revelation is story. Story tells us the suffering of the Minjung and their courageous resistance against injustice and also shares the vision of a new society. His socio-economic method pursues the infra-structure of revelation in the socio-economic life of the Minjung. He contends that revelation arises from "below" through the suffering of Minjung. His pneumatological method surpasses an interpretation based on the Bible alone. By emphasizing the work of the Holy Spirit, it seeks an answer for a problem not only in the Bible but also in the direct guidance of the Holy Spirit. It does not encourage us merely to repeat biblical events of the past in the present, but urges us to make our own new decisions in the present inspiration of the Holy Spirit. It presupposes the work of God’s Spirit in Korea prior to the introduction of Christianity to Korea (MPTCK 56). Suh mobilizes all these methods to disclose the reality of Han.
In addition to these approaches, Yong Bock Kim’s socio-biographical method and Young Hak Hyun’s cultural method deserve to be mentioned. Kim contends that theology must be the collective biography of the Minjung. To him, to write the suffering history of the Minjung in light of the Christ-event is the hermeneutical task of Minjung theology. Hyun thinks the Korean mask dances significant in their disclosing the hidden Han of the Minjung and in transcending their Han. The satirical performance of a mask dance guides the Minjung to the point of transcendence where their Han will be dissolved through laughing at themselves and at the absurdities of society.
Minjung hermeneutical methods are different from those of Latin American liberation theologians, which depend heavily on Marxist social analysis. The tools of Minjung hermeneutics do not derive from Marxist social analysis, but from the Minjung wisdom of life. The Minjung wisdom arises from their experience of suffering -- Han.
1. Minjung and process hermeneutics have a common denominator; they surpass the boundary of the Bible. Minjung hermeneutics, transcending the perimeter of Christianity, appropriates Korean history, culture, religion, and tradition. More concretely, making good use of stories, songs, mask dances, socio-biography, socio-economy, rumors, literature, history, shamanism, Buddhism, and Chondokyo (an indigenous religion), Minjung hermeneutics diagnoses Minjung’s Han and seeks its resolution. For Minjung theologians, beyond the sacred history of salvation in Christianity, all histories are sacred in God’s salvific plan. Process hermeneutics, especially John Cobb’s, based on the Christian faith, moves beyond the traditional limit of theology by engaging in dialogue with ecology, sociology, economy, and Buddhism. This removes the established walls between various disciplines and seeks the unbiased, undivided truth of life. It opens a new chapter in the world of hermeneutics. Overcoming religious parochialism and theological reductionism, both of them expand the horizons of theological hermeneutics to both interdisciplinary and inter-religious realms.
2. On the other hand, Minjung hermeneutics derives not only from Minjung wisdom, but also from Minjung theologians’ participation in the action of Minjung struggles -- street demonstrations, sit-in-strikes with workers, imprisonment, etc. In these struggles, they listen attentively to Minjung stories and become part of these stories. Through storytelling and their involvement in Minjung struggles, they have changed the oppressive social system of Korea.
Process hermeneutics grows out of Whitehead’s metaphysics. Whitehead’s notion of God does not actively participate in the transformation of the world but exercises the power of persuasion only. This image of God is quite different from that of the crucified God of Christians. Like Whitehead’ s idea of historical action for the transformation of the world. Process theology has basically remained as an academic movement in academic circles. It has sought "adventures of ideas," but not adventures of action. John Cobb is aware of this weakness in process theology:
"Process theology in the United States was at its furthest remove from a praxis orientation. Although its interest in a credible doctrine of God and God’s work in the world was grounded in existential and ultimately practical concerns, the relation to practice was little and poorly articulated. Although the situation has improved somewhat since then, recent process theology has still done little to clarify the relation between theory and practice." (PTPT 58)
Process hermeneutics needs to articulate the relation between theology and practice. For Paulo Freire, praxis is the interaction between action and reflection (PO 75). Praxis imoludes all historical efforts which move towards the liberation of the world. In this sense, process theology has been partially in praxis and has transformed the world in various ways and has raised people’s consciousness on several crucial issues. Especially, process feminists have actively taken part in the women’s liberation movement and have greatly contributed to the cultural revolution of the world.
Nevertheless, to promote the enrichment of experience more effectively, process theology needs to emphasize the side of action. By doing so, its contribution to the transformation of the world will be richer.
In this paper, I have tried to articulate my understanding of the hermeneutics of process and Minjung theologies by comparing their major problems, goals, and methodologies. Process theology perceives the evil of discord and triviality as problems, the attainment of the maximum of value in all actual entitles as goal, the mutual transformation in interaction with diverse communities as methodologies. In its encounter with Minjung theology, process theology may learn primarily the depths of human suffering shown in the abyss of Han and the necessity of the active involvement in the world for maximizing the intensity of experience.
As a historical and political movement, Minjung theology regards the Han of the Minjung as its problem, the resolution of Han in the millennium as its goal, and the biblical hermeneutic, storytelling, socio-biography, and mask dances as its methodologies. From process theology, Minjung theology may learn chiefly its idea of radical openness of the eschaton and its coherent idea of freedom. With the complementarity of these ideas, Minjung theology will be better equipped for its historical vocation to advance the millennium on earth.
MPTCK -- Park, A. Sung. Minjung and Pungryu Theologies in Contemporary Korea. Ph.D. Dissertation, Graduate Theological Union, 1985.
MT -- Kim, Yong Bock, ed. Minjung Theology. Singapore: The Christian Conference of Asia, 1981.
PO -- Freire, Paulo. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Translated by Myra Bergman Ramos. New York: The Seabury Press, 1974.
PPR -- Ricoeur, Paul. The Philosophy of Paul Ricoeur. Reagan, C. and Stewart, D. ed. Boston: Beacon Press, 1978.
PT -- Cobb, Jr., John B. and Griffin, David R. Process Theology: An Introductory Exposition. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1976.
PTPT -- Cobb, Jr., John B. Process Theology as Political Theology. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1982.
WR -- Christ, Carol and Plaskow, Judith, ed. Womanspirit Rising. New York: Harper & Row, 1979.