An Historical and Socio-Cultural Religion
I once had an opportunity to have a conversation with a conservative Korean Christian minister Yun Sogwon who, although not knowing Ham very well, had read a some of Ham's writings. He also had a positive impression of Ham's civil rights activities during the era of military dictatorship. I began my conversation with him by asking: "From a Christian minister's point of view, do you regard Ham as a Christian?" The minister's answer followed without any hesitation: "From the view of Christian doctrine, I cannot say Ham was a Christian. I am not sure of his view on the Trinity, atonement and the Cross." Despite this minister's claim it seems to me that the Christian faith resides in a way of life, more than in doctrine. The main concern of Jesus was neither keeping the legalism of the Old Testament nor preserving religious systems which were imposed by the Pharisees. His concern was to live spiritually and practically a moral humanistic life within his historical situation. Ham also tried to live with the spirit of Jesus as a way of life rather than subscribing to the doctrine of Christianity.
Equally Ham viewed human nature as fundamentally good and peaceful, apart from the Christian doctrine of original sin. Both Jesus and the Pharisees used and read the same scriptures, based on the Old Testament. But their interpretations were diametrically opposed as Ham noted: "Even the same Old Testament held totally different meanings for the Pharisees and Jesus". Jesus used it as the religion of free liberation, the Pharisees as the religion of imposed regulation.
In this respect, any religious organisation, or its doctrine, is not the same as the essence of its belief. Neither is church the same as God, nor is doctrine the same as the truth. Church and doctrine are just an instrument and a means to understand God and the truth. When a church and a doctrine are put before God and the truth, they become an idol. The meaning of religion is not delivering one's doctrine to others, but living within the truth. Religious doctrine may be necessary to explain the truth, but he who clings to the doctrine, cannot perceive the truth. Ham's fundamental concern was "living within the truth" not "clinging to the doctrine". As a Chinese monk says, the doctrine is like a finger which is clearly pointing to the moon (truth), but the finger itself is not the moon and cannot be the same as the moon. If we treat a relative concept (doctrine or established church) as the absolute concept (truth or God) then it is an idol.
One should also bear in mind that religious doctrine is only the symbolisation and interpretation of the truth. But the symbol and interpretation ought to be different according to different people, cultures and eras. The doctrine itself is just an appearance of the truth for a certain era in human history. A particular era requires a new phraseology of that which is everlasting. Ham's argument concerning the universal view of Christianity along with the historical environment of his time was explained thus: "If I were born in India I would likely be a Hindu. If I were born in China or Japan I would likely be a Buddhist. I was born in north Korea when Christianity was just being introduced there. That is the reason why I was influenced by Christianity more than anything else."
Ham believed that truth should have a historical perspective, and not be solely from the standpoint of an individual's life. He speculated that history was a perpetual process linked inseparably with the present: "History still lives in the present; it is something that is on the way to completion. History records selected facts, not just any facts; the criterion has to do with whether a fact is linked to life now." Believing the history of humanity to be a progression toward freedom and liberty, Ham also affirmed the significance of the notion of whole responsibility with regard to all historical events. Ham felt himself to be an associate in any historical transgression: "All sins and crimes are related to myself. I am involved as an assaulter [aggressor] in any sin and crime throughout the history of humanity. I am an accomplice in all the sins and crimes. I am rather the principal offender. I am a recidivist."
Since history changes continually and God's word is admitted in manifold divergent channels throughout history, Ham spoke of the need for constant change and re-interpretation of religious dogma and canons: "Religious canons originally contained principles to enhance life, not a columnar list of commands --- The vitality of a canon being its underlying spirit, the canon needs to be repeatedly reinterpreted. The canon has to be supported by the new life experience and a new interpretation of history."
The Bible is a fixed book, written 2,000 years ago. But humanity's understanding of the world and its outlook has grown throughout the last 2,000 years. In Ham's view, nowadays humanity's outlook on the world and religion is not the same as 2,000 years ago. Today, humanity's viewpoint on the world and religion is much broader and wider than in the previous twenty centuries. Compared with the contemporary world, the world of the Apostle Paul was a small presence. Paul grew up in a Hebrew realm and he knew the domains of Greece, Rome, Egypt and Macedonia. But Paul did not have any understanding of the spheres of India, China, Polynesia, America, the Arctic and Antarctic and Africa. Paul might have known the religions and philosophies of Babylon, Egypt, Hellas and Persia. But he was completely ignorant in regard to Vedanta, Hinduism, Buddhism, Confucianism and Taoism. What is more, Paul's knowledge of science and the scientific world cannot be compared to the knowledge held by the children of today.
Ham also stated the connection between Christianity and philosophical Taoism: "The God of Christianity is the Tao of Lao-tzu and Chuang-tzu. If we analyse this conceptually, there may be differences. But those who believe in a true faith, will regard it as the same in the end." Perhaps Mahatma Gandhi's comment can be used as a suitable example to explain what was in Ham's mind: "Truth like a diamond, has many facets and men can only glimpse some of them."
It is also useful to examine Ham's stress on the parallel between the God of Christianity and Tao of Lao-tzu:
"All Beings come from a Non-Being. God does not have a name. When Moses asked the name of God, God's answer was; 'I am that I am', because God is omnipotent, was it not that He knew we would be unable to understand the answer He would give about Himself more than 'that I am'. The universe and nature can exist because of a Non-Being, which is Limitless. Thus Lao-tzu declared that: 'The Tao that can be defined is not the constant Tao'."
In order to understand the broad range of Ham's appeal and the universal nature of his personality, it is only necessary to look at the variety of the editors of Ham's magazine, the Voice of the People. Among the editors were the eminent Christian, Kim Donggill; Pobjong, a Buddhist monk, who published several books on his meditations, and had an established reputation among the Korean intelligentsia; Kim Yongjun, a scientist and former professor of Korea (Koryo) University, who had participated in the Club of Rome Conference as a representative scholar of natural science in Korea - he was one of Korea's experts in the field of organic chemistry; and Song Konho, who worked at the Tong'a Daily Press as a leading journalist and as Managing editor until he was dismissed by Park Chunghee in 1975. In 1976 Song formed the Tong'a Committee for the Struggle for the Protection of Freedom of the Press and Speech. Although Song did not have any religious background, he had worked under Ham's leadership for the Voice of the People.
There was also a lawyer, Yi T'aeyong, who was the first female doctor of law in Korea and in 1976 she became the Magsaysay Award winner. She wrote most of Ham's human rights declaration drafts and she is an enthusiastic Christian. The very different religious and non-religious people that Ham chose were welded together by his far-reaching vision and inspiration.
While conducting the interviews for this thesis I met many of his followers. For example, when I met Dr.Chang Kiryo (1909-1995) in Pusan, I felt he was a very conservative Presbyterian and literal Biblicist. Although, Dr.Chang has a respected reputation because of his charitable works, and is a very intelligent man, his mind was as uncomplicated and as pure as a child's. He believed in a literal interpretation of the Bible. On the contrary, when I had interviews at his house with professor Ahn Byungmu the seminal leader of the Minjung theology, I felt his views were remarkably innovative, in a certain way somewhat radical. Even today, many Korean churches still do not accept Ahn's Minjung theology. Both these men are controversial figures; one very conservative, one very progressive. The above illustrates how widely polemical religious views were fused under the influence of Ham.
More remarkable is the impact which Ham made on the very different political groups in Korea. When Ham died, the President of South Korea, Roh Taewoo, proposed a Public Funeral for him. Previously, this same president had requested Ham to be the Head of the Seoul Peace Olympiad to represent the Korean people. Ideologically, ex-President Roh is right-wing and a Buddhist.
On the other hand, under Roh Taewoo's Presidency, on 25 March 1989, a striking radical leftist and a leading dissident, Rev.Mun Ikhwan, also a well known admirer of Ham, visited North Korea to promote re-unification without the authorisation of the South Korean government. In P'yongyang, Rev.Mun met the leader of North Korea, the late Kim Ilsung. On his return to South Korea on 13 April, Rev.Mun was promptly arrested and charged with violating national security laws. Six months later Rev.Mun was sentenced to ten years in prison. I regard the relationship between Rev.Mun and President Roh as two extremes, and yet both were able to admire and respect Ham because of his broadness.
Ham showed his wisdom and magnanimity by combining all the common aspects of humanity. This reflects Ham's capacious Universalism, embracing various religions, dissolving confusion within dissimilar peoples, and differing political groups. In Ham, all opposites were joined to produce a higher unity. Therefore, Ham was raised up as a symbolical and moral figure in Korea: above the political dimensions of left and right wing ideologies; above Christian and non-Christian conflicts; above conservatives and progressives. That is why, when discussing the life of Ham, Kim Donggill saw him as "a symbol of Korea's conscience" throughout the era of Japanese colonialism on the Korean peninsula, Communist totalitarianism in North Korea, and military dictatorship in South Korea.
Throughout his life, Ham emphasised two elements of Christianity and possibly of all religions: "love and justice". Thus when any regime oppressed the people, and abused its power through dictatorship, as Park and his followers did, Ham fought against it. On the other hand, when dictatorial regimes decayed and weakened, like that of Chun Doohwan and his followers, Ham showed his mercy toward them, the virtue of "malice toward none", and followed the way of 'Love' as the essence of Christianity. The above incidents with Park and Chun illustrate well a trait of Ham's tender yet resolute character.
Nevertheless, because of his broad tolerance, not only in religious matters but also in political matters, in many cases Ham was misunderstood even by his friends and followers. Ham felt a total responsibility, not only to good friends but also to his opponents, believing good and evil to be interlinked and to have the same root. That is why, when reading of the suicide of Judas in the New Testament Ham confessed that: "Good is not the good of the individual, but the good of the whole. Evil is not the evil of the individual, but the evil of the whole. Problems lie in the whole. Because of that, we must think in terms of the whole."
As Ham pointed out, the lower animals like paramecia could survive even if their bodies were cut off and separated from each other. But the higher animals, like human beings, cannot survive if their bodies are cut up and separated. Ham believed that higher beings 'inevitably' should be concerned with each other and ought to know that they are an organic body, rather than a mechanical one, he argued that: "The truth is thinking as a whole, the highest good is acting as a whole and justice is sensing as a whole." "If one's feet were infected by tetanus, eventually one's whole life would be threatened, not just one's feet. We are the one, it is an inescapable destiny." Ham considered today's society as opposed to yesterday's, to be an organic society and that no individual would avoid the influence of the whole society.