Abstract

Feminist theology in Asia should first pay attention to the particularities and diversities of experience among Asian women rather than begin with claims of commonality. Challenges for Asian and Korean feminist theology are discussed.  

Towards a mature feminist theology in Asia

Many feminists in the United States today are critical of what they see as the oversimplifications and generalizations of feminism in the 1970s. They challenge earlier classics of feminist theory and their interpretation of culture and history. The prime target of this academic feminist critique was the androcentric perspective of the male-dominated disciplines. Now feminist criticism has turned to its own perspectives, finding them reductionist and universalizing. As a result, many feminist scholars have abandoned universalizing theories and, instead of looking for the causes of women's oppression, have turned to more concrete investigation with more limited goals. For example, Sheila Greeve Davaney has analyzed the definition of women's experience by three North American feminist theologians: Mary Daly, Elizabeth Schussler Fiorenza and Rosemary R. Ruether. Davaney argues that they have tended to universalize their limited conception of women's experience, and further claims that "there is no 'experience in general', including the experiences of oppression and liberation. What there is, is particular, historically-circumscribed experience and knowledge."(1)

This criticism by a white feminist of white feminist theologians suggests to me that feminist theology in Asia too should first pay attention to the particularities and diversities of experience among Asian women rather than begin with claims of commonality. This does not mean that we should disregard similarities among groups such as black women, white women or yellow women. The point is that women's experience does not have one transcending common character, because experience is shaped by and in a particular time and place, which cannot be universal. Women are fragmented by race, class, historical events and individual differences.

Having studied in Korea, Germany and the USA, I regard the feminist theological critique of those Western feminist theologians who universalize or generalize from their own limited experience and perspective as a positive, constructive criticism, through which Western feminist theology has been able to attain maturity. But I have also realized that Western feminist theologians do not apply a similar standard to evaluate feminist theology in Asia. They seem to be very generous or to apply different academic standards towards the unexamined universalization of feminist theology in Asia. Why is this -- and is it a problem or a possibility for feminist theology in Asia to attain its maturity?

Indeed, feminist theology in Asia is in the early stage of development. It needs to grow further, to diversify, to deepen. But I would argue that this cannot exempt it from constructive criticism, because a theology free from criticism produces theological infantilism. As a feminist theologian, I see a song tendency of universalization and oversimplification in constructing and presenting feminist theology in Asia. Although Asian feminist theologians are in the same geographical region, they have real differences in experience, perspective and knowledge, and these differences require developing varied strategies for participation and transformation. While Western feminist theologians share a cultural and religious background based on the Judaeo-Christian tradition, Asian feminist theologians, despite certain common cultural bases, have extremely diverse histories, religions, cultures and traditions. Sharing a common goal to end primarily patriarchal domination does not prevent feminist theologians from having radically divergent perspectives on how that goal might be reached.

I am raising this issue because I would like to see a feminist theology in Asia that flourishes in a more diverse way and thus attains its maturity. Also I want people who do not fully recognize the plurality and diversity of Asian women to be able to hear multiple voices from Asia. Feminist theology should encourage us to tolerate and interpret ambivalence, ambiguity and multiplicity. Moreover, any feminist theological perspective will necessarily be partial.(2) Asian feminist theologians must explore the new possibilities opened up by the recognition of the permanent partiality of the feminist perspective. In this sense, although we as feminist theologians in Asia must oppose oppressive systems, we cannot do so by appeal to a universal Asian women's experience or perspective. We can do so only in the name of our own location in a particular time and place. Like any other theology, feminist theology in Asia needs constructive criticism, both from Asian feminist theologians in various countries and from feminist theologians in the West.

This paper is written from my own perspective as a theologian living and teaching in Korea. I will try not to misrepresent or under-represent feminist theology and the situation of women in Korea, where diverse religions co-exist and patriarchy has been a strong ideology to justify the invisibility of women and trivialize women's activities in every dimension of life. In this context, women have been nobody(3) and women's voices have not been fully heard. While not offering an overview of or introduction to the development of feminist theology in Asia,(4) I shall try, with an insider's eye, to see not only what feminist theology in Asia and in particular Korea has done but also what it lacks. The mature development of feminist theology in Asia needs not just compliments and applause but also critical self-evaluation. Thus, the intention of this paper is to offer a perspective on where Asian women (focusing especially on Korea), have been and where we are, and to suggest where we want to go, especially in theology and the church.

Has patriarchy really been challenged?

In Asian societies the term patriarchy is not often heard.

Since patriarchy, which primarily denotes the domination of men over women, has been seen as natural, it does not need to be clarified or analyzed. Over the centuries, the position of women in Asia, as in the West, has been one of subordination and control by men, whether in the family or in society. Women were confined to the domestic sphere, and this confinement was reinforced by a concern to preserve the virtue, honour and chastity of women.

Let me cite an example from Korea. When Confucianism was adopted from China in 1392 by the founder of the Yi Dynasty, it introduced into Korean society the principle of agnation, which made men alone the structurally relevant members of society and relegated women to social dependence. By contrast, during the Koryo period (918-1392), before Confucianism was introduced, Korean women were largely in command of their own lives. Patrilineage was not the basic unit of society; inheritance was equally divided among sons and daughters; female lines were as important as male lines; and the remarriage of widows was not unusual. The introduction of Confucianism caused a decisive change. Sons were preferred to daughters. Only sons could continue the family line and receive an inheritance, with the oldest son receiving the largest share. Daughters were raised for others and considered outsiders once they had married.

After marriage, Korean women retain their family name. Some argue that this shows that they are more liberated than Western women who assume their husband's name after marriage. In fact, I believe, this does not mean that the Korean woman's own identity is respected, but that she is conceptually an outsider, brought into the household to provide services that cannot be provided by the true family member. She is not integrated into her new household; and in her natal home she is referred to as a chul ga oe in, which means an outsider who left the household. Even though women may have authority and power in the domestic sphere (as many men argue when it is said that they dominate women), their authority and power can be totally controlled by men, who make the major decisions in their lives. While I' do not want to oversimplify the current situation of women in Asia or Korea, it would not be an exaggeration to say that the lives of most women, regardless of their social class, have been controlled by men.

The influence of the Confucian tradition on contemporary Korea is significant. To different degrees Korean attitudes towards political and social authority, family and interpersonal relationships, the workplace and education, remain strongly influenced by Confucian values, which are based on the idea of the male supremacy. Even though Confucian texts are seldom read, Confucian rituals have been simplified or abandoned and few people would call themselves Confucians, the attitudes associated with Confucianism still guide people's concrete lives. Patriarchal and hierarchical Confucianism probably has more influence on Koreans than any other traditional religion or philosophy. Behind the Korean acceptance of modern science, modern concepts of progress and growth, universal principles of ethics anddemocratic ideals lie strong Confucian values, including belief in the moral basis of government, emphasis on interpersonal relationships and loyalties and faith in education and hard work.

In the early twentieth century the Confucian conception of human relations and the ritual observances that perpetuated those androcentric values were criticized, mainly in terms of imprisoning individual freedom and creativity by emphasizing hierarchical and male-dominated relationships. Confucian exaltation of the authority of father and son made the unequal treatment of women seem natural. The subordination of wives to husbands and of daughters to all men in the family, the loss of inheritance rights, inequitable marriage laws and unequal treatment in genealogical records can be cited as proof of the sexual inequality fostered by Confucian tradition.

Contemporary feminists have proposed the idea of inter-relatedness in opposition to the traditional definition of maturity as autonomy, separation or independence. In this sense, Confucian emphasis on inter-relatedness between humans can be positively recognized. However, it should be noted that in Confucian relationships one role carries the duty of exercising authority and the other obedience, and it has been always formulated on the basis of hierarchical and androcentric presuppositions. With an asymmetrical underlying assumption, how can the normative meaning of interrelatedness become manifest? Claiming women's ontological, social and familial equality with men seems impossible in a Confucian culture because of its fundamental assumption of male supremacy. In the Confucian emphasis on relationships, women's subordination has become proverbial.(5) Confucius is believed to have said of women that:

Women indeed are human beings, but they are of a lower state than men and can never attain to full equality with them. The aim of female education therefore is perfect submission, not cultivation and development of the mind.(6)

Although this Confucian view of woman might have changed in modern Asian countries, I would say that the patriarchal value system in Asian traditions, such as in Confucianism, has never been challenged by a feminist consciousness in a real sense. Patriarchy wears different clothing in different periods, but it has not yet been questioned in Asia.

Dangerous memory

According to Sharon Welch, liberation theology begins with actual resistance to oppressive aspects of society, the institutional church and theology. Dangerous memory is a significant factor of liberation theology and has two dimensions: memory of hope, freedom and resistance, and memory of suffering, conflict and exclusion.(7) I think dangerous memory is also a starting point of feminist theology. But I wonder whether we Asian women have this kind of dangerous memory. Indeed we have tremendous memories of suffering and exclusion, but we seem not to have as much memory of freedom and resistance as of suffering and oppression. Recognizing this lack of resistance is painful. In my view, the major reason for it is found in two characteristics of Asian culture: the culture of survival and the culture of the three obediences of women.

The culture of survival. Most Asian countries have been categorized as "third world" or "developing" countries. They have struggled to produce socio-economic development. They have to survive. Women's inferior status to men has not seemed to be a problem because survival is regarded as the most urgent and important issue. Concepts like human dignity and human rights seem like luxuries to most people who are struggling daily for life. Thus women's struggle to improve their status in the family or society never gets enough attention from women or men. Criticism of tradition is not accepted because tradition is the only thing that sustains their existence in the culture of survival.

The culture of the three obediences of women. In most Asian countries, women are considered as dependent. Throughout life a woman's duty is to follow the three obediences: before marriage to obey the father, after marriage to obey the husband, and, in the event of the husband's death, to obey their son. Women are not supposed to act autonomously. This dependence makes the importance of the male overwhelming. The most apparent means for ensuring the acquiescence of women in their own subordination was the dominant use of ideological mechanisms. The cosmological foundation for the elaborate code of subordination in East Asia is to be found in ancient Chinese beliefs dating from the first millennium BC. These held that the universe is composed of two interacting elements: yin the female, moon, and yang the male, sun. The yin elements displayed dark, weak and passive attributes in contrast to yang elements, which were characterized by all that was bright, strong and active. While man was endowed with the firm nature of heaven, woman partook of the yielding nature of the earth. Originally conceived as interacting and complementary, this cosmology was soon arranged in hierarchical relationships of superiority and inferiority, goodness and evil. In time, yin elements came to stand for all that was negative and inferior in the universe.(8)

From this cosmic pattern it was deduced that the position of women in the human order should be lowly and inferior like the earth, and that the proper behaviour for a woman is to be yielding and weak, passive and still like the earth. This revised cosmological belief was incorporated into the teachings of Confucius and his disciples and has been used as a patriarchal ideology, which has reinforced and justified women's submission to men. It has perpetuated the belief that women are different and inferior to men as earth is to heaven.(9) Even today, many people who think women and men are equal do not go beyond the pseudo-egalitarian idea of equal but different.

When I was studying in the USA, I was struck by the idea of yin and yang as an alternative to the conflictual Western dualism which has been criticized by many feminist theologians as the ideological framework for dividing the human reality in two. I was disappointed to discover that the idea of yin and yang has a hidden sexism and had never been practised in a complementary way in reality. I have concluded that patriarchy has been and still is universal, even though women experience it in different ways. Sustained by cosmological beliefs, patriarchy is seen as natural.

In the culture of survival and of the three obediences it is very hard to find "revolutionary subjects". Freud's thesis that religion, morals and society arise out of and are means of dealing with problems and conflicts within the family -- in particular man's relation to his father(10) -- is borne out in Confucian society, where the family is enshrined as a sacred community and the centre of the family is the father. Women's three obediences to men throughout their entire lives form the foundation of preserving the family order and virtues. Mary Daly claims that "if God is male, then the male is God".(11) I would argue, conversely, that if the head of the family is male, then God, the Head of all the family in the world, is Male.

In the Confucian ethos, it is very hard for women to have dangerous memory in a full sense, on which a feminist theology of liberation should be based. While Asian women have a memory of suffering, we rarely have a memory of freedom and resistance in our history. Therefore, it is our task to create the will to freedom and resistance both as individuals and as groups.

Korean women in theology and church

Protestantism was introduced to Korea in 1884. It is often said that Christianity played a major role in advancing the status of Korean women. Early missionaries saw the role education could play in enhancing the potential of women and undertook this task as their primary mission. Education programmes began with Bible schools and classes. By attending church services and Bible schools, some Korean women did expand their lives beyond the Confucian confinement of women to the private sphere.(12)

Christianity in Korea did not, however, shake the deep dimension of Confucian patriarchy. Rather, the patriarchal elements in Christianity came to be combined with the patriarchal value system of Confucianism. Thus it is difficult to understand the Korean church without looking at the core ideology of the Confucian androcentric value system. Although more than a quarter of the Korean population is Christian today, Korean Christians continue to be influenced by the Confucianism on which their social and individual value systems are based. This combination of Christian and Confucian patriarchy seems to be one of the major reasons the leadership of Korean Christian women has not been well developed.

Although women are more than 70 percent of Korean Christians, they have largely been excluded from decision-making offices. In the Methodist church, women were allowed to be ordained from 1931 (interestingly, 14 North American female missionaries were first ordained in the Korean Methodist Church because the US Methodist Church did not ordain women clergy until 1956).(13) In this sense, the Korean Methodist Church was a pioneer allowing women in ministry. But we Korean women are seeing that the mere existence of women clergy does not guarantee their acceptance in practice. Leadership of both lay and clergy women is not encouraged. There are a very few places for clergy women to work. There is no female bishop in Korean Christianity. In the case of the Presbyterian Church, women have been struggling for ordination without success since 1933.

The Korean church is known worldwide for its rapid growth. The theme of the Ecumenical Decade of Churches in Solidarity with Women, however, is virtually unknown. Most churches never talk about it, for women's issues might be considered as obstacles to church growth. Why is the Korean church so reluctant to accept the claim of equality of women and men? I would suggest three reasons: religious exclusivism, denominational exclusivism, and strong antagonism against feminism.

In Asian countries, many religions co-exist. When Western missionaries came to Asia, they taught that being Christian meant rejecting other religions. To become a Christian, therefore, has implied an antagonism towards one's own religion and customs. From the beginning, religious exclusivism has closed the ears of Asian churches to any criticism of Christian tradition and doctrine made by feminist theologians. Since Asian churches have to compete with other religions, they are very nervous about any criticism of Christianity. This is the major reason why most Asian churches are more conservative than Western churches that have nothing to lose by espousing religious pluralism.

Because of religious exclusivism, religious pluralism is considered heresy by major Asian denominations. It can be discussed in an academic setting, but in the ministerial setting it is seen as putting Christian identity at risk. To maintain their Christian identity among many religions, Asian Christians think that they must be exclusive and conservative, and feminist theology seems to be an obstacle to that. So, regrettably, the antagonism towards feminist theology among many who do not know what it is-really about is getting stronger.

This religious exclusivism is connected to denominational exclusivism. I have found that the more exclusive people are about Christianity, the more exclusive they are in their denominationalism. Competition between denominations in Korea is strong. Most churches are very eager to expand their denominational power and want to show their growth. This, I believe, is why they do not want to hear feminist voices which seem to challenge the core of Christian tradition. Antagonism against feminism is especially prevalent in the area of theology and ministry. Many regard feminist theology as heresy; others dismiss it as a women's matter that has nothing to do with real theology and ministry. The majority of theologians do not regard feminist theology as academic, but as a peculiar preoccupation of certain women, with which they need not concern themselves.

This phenomenon is by no means limited to Korea. Asian women, both in the academic world and the church, have been experiencing these obstacles, which make it difficult to mount effective resistance in theology and ministry. The painful recognition that Asian women do not have a dangerous memory of freedom and resistance often leads to defeatism, as women who seek gender justice become trapped in cultured despair.(14) They see all kinds of injustice, especially to women, but find it impossible to resist it because no explicit memory of resistance, explicit support and definitive solutions are found.

Feminist theology in Korea

Feminist theology was introduced to Korea in the 1970s when some feminist theological articles from the West were translated into Korean, and a few feminist theologians introduced by Korean women theologians. But it has been difficult for Korean women to articulate and challenge the patriarchal factors hidden in every dimension of theology and church because they have not been sufficiently trained to articulate their own concerns, needs and visions, and to try to transform unjust situations. Silence has been one of the highest virtues for women. Especially in theological circles, there are only a few women with a feminist perspective who have enough academical training properly to challenge the mainstream of church and theology. Due to this lack of academic leadership, feminist theology in Korea is not well balanced in developing various areas of theology. This lack of human resources can be one reason there has been little change so far in the status of women in church and theology in Korea.

Feminist theology in Korea has not yet produced a theoretically acceptable rationale for the necessity of a transformation of church and theology. Therefore, it has not been successful in influencing a paradigm shift in church and theology. I am not arguing that it is the fault of feminist theologians that there is almost no change in Korean church and theological discourse even though feminist theology was introduced to Korea more than twenty years ago. Rather, I am saying that feminist theology in Korea must be developed in diverse areas of theory and praxis and must expand its perspective and task as well.

Exclusion of women in theology and church is still seen as natural. In the major seminaries there are only a few women theologians who have a feminist consciousness and are at the same time fully employed by the seminary, teaching in the major area of theology. In the ecumenical setting, the reunification of the two Koreas is always the important issue. As far as I know, women's issues have not received full attention from the National Council of Churches in Korea (NCCK). Except for the women's desk, the leadership of the NCCK has been exercised almost solely by men.

Before Christianity was introduced to Korea, the place of women in society was confined to the private sphere -- the kitchen. Since Christianity has flourished in Korea, the place of women in church has been confined to the corresponding sphere in the church -- the kitchen. The activities of the women's societies in Korean churches are mostly related to the kitchen. Though women outnumber men in church, they do not participate in decision-making and their place remains in the private sphere to which Confucian patriarchy assigned them. Not that fully admitting women into all the orders of ministry will end the discrimination against women, because the underlying problems will not be resolved by an act of administrative reorganization.

Women in the Korean church have played a secondary role, the role of serving men, without acknowledging the potential that God has given equally to men and women, and without recognizing that meaningless service to male pastors and church leaders is not the sacrificial love that Jesus teaches. Before Christianity came to Korea, Korean women were expected and forced to sacrifice themselves in the name of filial piety, which was the most important virtue in Confucianism. While men are not expected to sacrifice themselves, women are now expected and forced to sacrifice themselves in the name of Jesus' sacrificial love, which is considered as the most important Christian virtue. Korean men have been Confucian patriarchs. Now they have become Confucian-Christian patriarchs. In this sense, the place of women in Korea has not been changed by Christianity or by feminist theology. What then should feminist theology in Korea avoid and pursue in order to achieve the equality of men and women in theology and church?

First, feminist theology in Korea should avoid a tendency to dichotomize theory and praxis and work instead to comprehend feminist theoretical analysis and its practice. When we think of transformation, we always have to think of the multiplicity of transformation. To my understanding, there are at least two dimensions of transformation: subjective and objective. The former is a transformation of consciousness, theory and principles; the latter a transformation of objective conditions such as law, language and regulation. These two dimensions are essentially interconnected.

In my view, feminist theology in Korea has put the emphasis on objective transformation and has not developed in various areas of theology. In theological or ministerial discourses, therefore, feminist theological issues have not been properly introduced and discussed. Formulating theory for transformation and analyzing the inequality of men and women are significant because socio-political and religious institutions have operated by the ideology of patriarchy. Our reality has been constructed by the principle of male supremacy. In this sense, to challenge the very core of our ideological framework, formulating a theoretical rationale, is significant at this stage of feminist development in Korea. Without critical theories about oppression, emotion can scarcely sustain the struggle over the long haul. I agree with Audre Lorde, who emphasizes the importance of connecting feelings to analysis, so that feeling informs thoughts.(15) Furthermore, I would argue that feeling and thought, emotion and reason, and theory and praxis interact -- or should interact.

Second, feminist theology in Korea should avoid the strong tendency of romanticizing and idealizing traditional Korean religions and cultures in seeking alternatives to Christianity as resources for feminist theology. In doing so, the hidden sexism of these resources is not seen and the vision and hope women need are misled. Feminist theologians need to be more critical about the patriarchal factors of both Christianity and other religions in searching for new resources. The issue of discontinuity from and continuity with the past should be carefully examined. Romanticizing Asian traditions and religions might be attractive to those unfamiliar with the Oriental mood, because these traditions or religious practices seem new and alternative to them. For Korean women, however, who have long suffered from those religions and traditions, romanticizing a particular aspect of them can blur the root causes of oppression.

I do not want to minimize the importance of exploring the liberating sources in Asian and Korean cultural and religious traditions. In many cases, however, exploring these can play the role of sustaining an existing patriarchal value system. For example, some Asian feminist theologians have explored the possibility of formulating feminist theology on the basis of the many female deities in Asian religions and literature. However, these goddesses often exist to fulfil patriarchal expectations, such as making women bear sons rather than daughters. Idealizing and romanticizing the female god is not the solution to the antagonism to feminist theology. Many women employ the idea of the female god to promote the view that women are essentially mothers and that women are inherently more loving and nurturing than men. Adrienne Rich critically points out:

It can be dangerously simplistic to fix upon "nurturance" as a special strength of women, which need only be released into the larger society to create a new human... Theories of female power and female ascendancy must reckon fully with the ambiguities of our being, and with the continuum of our consciousness, the potentialities for both creative and destructive energy in each of us.(16)

Indeed, it is not liberating for feminist theology to romanticize Asian and cultural and religious tradition, as some have suggested. As shown in the analysis above of the cosmology of yin and yang, separating reality into two essences, male and female, ultimately creates only a cosmic rationalization for sex role stereotyping. I see this danger of blurring the root cause of oppression also in feminist exaltation of a female god, which begins by with separating human reality into two.

Third, feminist theology in Asia and Korea should avoid the tendency of oversimplifying or romanticizing women's experience and must see the multiplicity of women's experience in Asia. For example, some feminist theologians in Asia identify Asian women's suffering with that of Jesus,(17) without analyzing the difference between Jesus' suffering and Asian women's suffering. The idea of common suffering might offer Asian women the affirmation of their suffering. In my view, however, this romanticizing or oversimplifying of Asian women's suffering, which occurs not by women's choice, but primarily by the patriarchal forces of various socio-religious traditions in Asia, is very dangerous. It can blur the root causes of Asian women's suffering by patriarchy and thereby serves patriarchal interest. Clearly, Jesus did not suffer from patriarchy, which primarily denotes the domination of men over women. Unlike the suffering of Jesus, the suffering of women is not: something that leads humans to salvation, but is something that women must overcome and eradicate. Women should not live with the suffering or not give up fighting to eliminate it. Such false assurance too easily makes women content with limited options. Nor does it help them to see their problems in a concrete reality. It hinders the development of dangerous memory of freedom and resistance against unjust suffering.

In simplifying Asian women's experience, we fail to see the pluralism in Asian women's lives, perspectives, creativities and theology. Feminist theology should recognize that pluralism is an important move towards freedom and liberation. We Asian women need more than a simple explanation of our situation and our problems in order to understand both the underlying causes of women's oppression and what it means to work collectively for transformation of the structure of domination.

To attain maturity and to create the dangerous memory of freedom and resistance, self-criticism and healthy scepticism are necessary. A mature feminist theology should encourage us to tolerate and explore ambiguity and the plurality of views and tasks. How has feminist theology actually affected Christian community? What effects can we realistically expect in the future? How can feminist theology itself contribute to creating a just society in our concrete reality?

Women's struggle against sexism, racism, classism and defeatism provides no guarantee of victory. I believe, however, that it does provide a ground of hope and foster the dangerous memory of freedom and resistance. The struggle may not be enough to overcome all kinds of oppression in our time, but I am convinced that it is the best we have.

1 Sheila Greeve Davaney, "The Limits of the Appeal to Women's Experience", in Shaping New Vision: Gender and Values in American Culture, eds Clarissa W. Atkinson et al., Ann Arbor, Michigan, UMI Research Press, 1987, p.46.

2 On partiality in feminist perspective see Sandra Harding, The Science Question in Feminism, Ithaca, NY, Cornell UP, 1986, pp.30-36.

3 Symbolic of the status of women in one village in northeastern China was the reply given to male visitors when the men of the house happened to be out. The customary answer to the question "Is anybody at home?" was "No, there's nobody in" -- given by the housewife herself; I. Crooks and D. Crooks, The First Years of Yangyi Commune, London, 1966, p.211. A woman under patriarchy, I would say, is viewed as a non-person, a nobody.

4 For such an introduction see Virginia Fabella, Beyond Bonding: A Third World Women's Theological Journey, Manila, Ecumenical Association of Third World Theologians & Institute of Women's Studies, 1993.

5 Regarding the Five Cardinal Relationships, Mencius said: "According to the way of man, if they are well fed, warmly clothed and comfortably lodged but without education, they will become almost like animals. The sage worried about it and he appointed Hsieh to be minister of education and teach people human relations, that between father and son. there should be affection; between husband and wife, there should be attention to their separate functions; between old and young, there should be a proper order; and between friends, there should be faithfulness"; A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy, tr. and compiled by Wing-Tsit Chan, Princeton, Princeton UP, 1963, pp.69-70. To illustrate the Confucian view of women is to look carefully at its conception of the human relationship based on family. The position of women is inextricably linked to the structure of the family. The family generates three of the Five Cardinal Relationships and society generates the other two.

6 Margaret E. Burton, The Education of Women in China, New York, Revell, 1911, p.19, italics added.

7 Sharon D. Welch, Communities of Resistance and Solidarity: A Feminist Theology of Liberation, Maryknoll, NY, Orbis, 1985, pp.35-42.

8 Julia Ching, Confucianism and Christianity: A Comparative Study, New York, Kodansha International, 1977, p.117.

9 A more extended discussion of this is found in my dissertation, "Ideology and Utopia: Taoist and Feminist Theological Responses to the Ideological Structures of Confucianism and Christianity" (Drew University, 1993).

10 Sigmund Freud, Totem and Taboo, tr. James Strachey, New York, Norton, 1953, p.157.

11 Mary Daly, Beyond God the Father: Toward a Philosophy of Women 's Liberation, Boston, Beacon Press, 1973, p.19.

12 Cf. Lee Woo-Chung, A History of Hundred Years of Korean Christian Women, Seoul, Minjung Sa, 1985, pp.20-49. It is interesting that in 1895, about ten years after Protestantism was introduced to Korea, Elizabeth Cady Stanton first published The Woman's Bible in the USA, in which she argued that the Bible is a political weapon against women's struggle for liberation; cf. The Original Feminist Attack on the Bible: Woman's Bible, ed. Elizabeth C. Stanton, New York, Arno, repr. 1974, p.9. Just when Christianity began to be criticized from a feminist perspective in the USA, in Korea it was regarded a liberating religion for women. Comparing these two different responses, I wonder whether it was Christianity itself or Western culture that played a relatively emancipatory role for Korean women in the 19th century. Clearly Christianity has always played both the role of liberator and of oppressor in different times and places.

13 Lee Duk-Joo, A History of the Korean Methodist Women's Society: 1897-1990, Seoul, Korean Methodist Women's Society for Christian Service, 1991, p.354.

14 On this term see Sharon Welch, A Feminist Ethic of Risk, Minneapolis, Fortress, 19W, pp.103-22.

15 Audre Lorde, "Uses of the Erotic: The Erotic as Power", in Sister Outsider: Essays and Speeches, Freedom, California, Crossing Press, 1984.

16 Adrienne Rich, Of Woman Born: Motherhood as Experience and Institution, New York, Norton, 1986, p.283.

17 Cf. Chung Hyun Kyung, Struggle to be the Sun Again, Maryknoll NY, Orbis, 1990, pp.53-57.

Nam-Soon Kang is instructor at Ewha Women's University and Methodist Theological Seminary, Seoul, Korea.