ÆíÁý : 2024.3.10 ÀÏ 17:55
 
 
Àüü±â»ç  ±â»ç¸ð¾Æº¸±â ÈÄ¿ø¹æ¹ý
 Á¦1ȸ ¾ð´õ¿ìµÎ ±¹Á¦Çмú½ÉÆ÷Áö¾ö(¿ø¹®)1°­ 2°­ 3°­
 ÀÛ¼ºÀÚ : ±èÁ¾Èñ ¸ñ»ç  2009-07-03 00:10:06   Á¶È¸: 4427   
¿µ¾î¸¦ Àß ÇϽô ºÐµéÀ» À§ÇÏ¿© °­ÀÇ 3°³¸¦ ´Ù ¿©±â ½Ç¾ú½À´Ï´Ù. ¼£·Ò

1. The Church's Worship Today: New Challenges, New Opportunities Richard J. Mouw

In the early 1980s I attended an exhibit of works by contemporary artists, and I was intrigued by one artwork in particular, especially since there was a visual account of how the work had been created. The artist had covered a large sheet of plywood with Elmer¡¯s Glue. Then, while the glue was still wet, he had taken a cello that he had purchased and smashed it onto the sheet of plywood, which was lying flat on the floor of his studio. . Wherever the pieces fell onto the plywood, he let them stay there until they hardened. And the result was his work of art. He had produced several other similar works, and he would sell each of them for well over a thousand US dollars. I was teaching in a philosophy department at the time, and the next week we were having a faculty discussion about the philosophy of art. One of my colleagues was an expert in this area, and I told him about this artwork, and asked him to help me to understand this kind of creative activity.¡°What is going on with this artist?¡± I asked my colleague. ¡°How are we to understand his smashed cello glued onto a piece of plywood as a work of art?¡± His answer was a helpful one for me. Whenever we see a puzzling art work of this sort, he said, we should think of the artist as at least implicitly asking us this question: ¡°OK, would you call this a work of art?¡±—thus inviting us to think about the appropriate categories and boundaries for evaluating artistic works. In the past, we could assume that a painting or a sculpture was something that was planned and carefully executed. And the resulting work was often expected to display some sort of beauty or harmony. This artist was challenging those traditional conceptions by a violent act that caused something associated with beauty and harmony to break into pieces, and to be allowed to stay wherever they happened to fall.Those of us who are familiar with contemporary philosophical trends know that this artist was practicing what today we call ¡°postmodern deconstructionism.¡± This artist was ¡°decontructing¡±—taking apart, dismantling—traditional definitions of a work of art. He was implicitly asking us to revise our definitions of an art work, to develop the kind of critical perspective that calls long-standing assumptions into question. The Christians that I know best are quite conservative folks, who subscribe to an ¡°evangelical¡± faith. They are not the kind of people who would pay a thousand dollars or more to purchase the work of art I have just described. If I were to explain to them what postmodernism and deconstructionism are all about, they would not be very sympathetic. The idea that we should call into question convictions and assumptions that have guided human beings for centuries would be offensive to them. What is interesting, though, is that many of those same Christians have been engaged in an extensive ¡°deconstructionist¡± project in their understanding of the life and mission of the Christian church. They may not like it when an artist does something that challenges traditional understandings of a work of art by asking, ¡°OK, would you call this a work of art?¡± But they have been asking very similar questions about many tradition conceptions and practices in the Christian community. While they may not be explicitly asking ¡°deconstructionist¡± about worship and ministry, they have nonetheless been asking them implicitly: ¡°OK, would you call this a hymn?¡± ¡°OK, would you call this a worship service?¡± ¡°OK, would you call this a church building?¡± ¡°OK, would you call this a sermon?¡± ¡°OK, would you call this a minister?¡±These questions have been raised in many different ways and in many different contexts in North America. The ¡°seeker-sensitive¡± churches have given somewhat different answers than what we are now referring to as the ¡°emerging¡± or the ¡°emergent¡± churches. But while the answers may be different, the questions are very similar. These questions are symptomatic of a widespread dissatisfaction among a younger generation of Christians with traditional ways of being church. The result has been new forms of worship music, new styles of preaching, new ways of organizing the life and ministry of the church, and even new ways of configuring the physical spaces for worship.In this lecture I want to discuss some of the issues at stake here in these reccent efforts to ¡°deconstruct¡± many of our traditional church practices, and especially in the area of our worshiping life. Obviously, I am not going to be able to deal with all of the important issues that need to be addressed. But I do want to offer some thoughts about what is good about these newer experiments in church life, as well as pointing to some of the dangers that are associated with these patterns. I hope we can all agree that it is not necessarily a bad thing to raise questions about how we might change the ways in which we structure the worshiping life of our churches. I am a Presbyterian speaking here as the guest of a wonderful Presbyterian congregation. We Presbyterians are children of the Protestant Reformation of the 16th century, and the great Reformers who established the Protestant churches, Martin Luther and John Calvin, did so because they were committed to the important principle that the church must always be willing to ¡°reform according to the Word of God.¡± In the light of that principle, the idea of ¡°deconstructing¡± is not a totally foreign notion. To deconstruct is to take things apart. Sometimes it is necessary to do that, to take things apart. But that can never be the end result., We also need to put things back together again, to re-form. Deconstructing is only part of our task, the first stage in the larger task of re-forming, of re-constructing things.The Reformers also were very clear about what must motivate us in our re-forming efforts. We must be guided by a deep desire to do things according to the teachings of God¡¯s Word. For those of us in the Presbyterian/Reformed tradition, then, the important question is always whether the changes we are trying to bring about are faithful to what God has revealed to us in his Word.With that in mind, I want to talk about contemporary issues in worship in the light of two instructions from the Apostle Paul. The first instruction encourages us to think new thoughts about worship and the ways in which we organize the life of our churches. The second instruction that I will point to makes it clear that we need to be sure to preserve some important things—and I want to suggest that some of those important things are often neglected in many of the recent ¡°seeker sensitive¡± patterns of worship.But first the word of encouragement to be open to thinking about change. The instruction here comes from I Cor. 9:22, where the Apostle reports: ¡°I have become all things to all people, so that I might by any means save some.¡± The apostle is raising an issue here that is important for the church in every age and in every cultural context to keep in mind. What does it mean for us to ¡°become all things to all people¡±?This is an urgent question right now for the churches of North America, where we are facing dramatic changes in our religious life. As I was preparing this lecture, a major report was released by a leading organization that studies religious patterns in American life. This report received much attention in the news media in the United States. The survey showed that there is much shifting in the population¡¯s religious affiliations. People are moving from one kind of church to another, and many are simply giving up on any sort of organized religious group. The United States has always been predominantly Protestant, but that remains the case by only a narrow margin of 51%. The big change, though, is in the younger generation: only 43% of people in the age group of 18 to 29 years old now identify themselves as Protestant. And four out of every ten adults in the United States have either changed religious affiliation at some point in their lives or have simply abandoned their relationship to any religious group. In a major article on this subject, published in newspapers all over the United States, Connie Kang, a reporter for the Los Angeles Times (and herself a Korean-American Presbyterian) described two of the persons she had interviewed in this way:Steve Savage, 53, of San Diego said switching religions was common in his family. He grew up in a house with a Lutheran mother and a Roman Catholic father who attended an Episcopal church. His parents later switched to a charismatic congregation. Although they started out as Presbyterians, Savage said he and his wife eventually joined a nondenominational church. "I fundamentally did not change what I believe, but I changed brands," Savage said.Leo Poveda, 43, a Los Angeles native who was born into a Catholic family, said he became a nondenominational evangelical in 2004. Catholicism "never took a hold of me," he said. It was too formal and ritualistic with a "maze of people and titles."Since becoming an evangelical, Poveda says said he feels his faith has come alive: "This is God talking to me."These kinds of stories have reinforced the idea, prominent in many commentaries on these recent trends, that religion in the United States has come to be dominated by ¡°consumerism.¡± People no longer attend churches out of loyalty to a tradition or to a doctrinal system. Instead they begin by identifying what they ¡°need¡± from a worship service or a religious community, and then they ¡°shop around¡± until they find something that satisfies their felt needs. It is interesting in this regard that one of the persons just described said that in changing denominations he had ¡°changed brands.¡± I heard someone recently, in criticizing this trend of changing religious affiliations, draw an analogy to preferences in soft drinks. The person who leaves a Presbyterian church for a more charismatic congregation is like a longtime Coca Cola drinker who tires of the taste of that soft drink, so he switches to Pepsi Cola. He finds that his new brand has a taste that is a little more stimulating. Religion has become much like tastes in foods, the critic suggested. We no longer have brand loyalty in our religious life. We keep shopping around until we find something that—for a while at least—satisfies our needs.There is something to be said for this concern about a consumerist spirit in religion, and I will point out the dangers of ¡°shopping around¡± a little further on. But first I want to caution against drawing too close of a parallel between changing religious affiliation and switching brands in our tastes in food. Religion and physical hunger are certainly alike in that each of them is grounded in very real human needs. Without food we starve. And without spiritual nourishment we also starve. In the well knownwords of the first question and answer of our Westminster Shorter Catechism, our ¡°chief end¡± as human beings ¡°is to glorify God and to enjoy him forever.¡± When we cut ourselves off from a vital relationship with God, by ignoring the means of grace that God has made available to us in the life of the Christian church, we become less than we have been created to be, We try to find our ultimate satisfaction in the wrong places, and eventually this is a path that leads to spiritual death.Interestingly, the Bible itself draws a parallel between our spiritual needs and our need for food and drink. Jesus talks about those who ¡°hunger and thirst after righteousness.¡± And the Psalmist describes his own longing for God as like a desperately thirsty deer who is panting as a searches for a stream from which ti can drink.The difference between or physical needs and our spiritual ones, of course, is that our spiritual longings are much more basic to who we are as human beings. They have to do with our ¡°chief end,¡± the fulfillment of our created nature. It should not surprise us, then, if people today would think at least as much about what they are ¡°consuming¡± in their spiritual lives as they do in the decisisons they make about what they will eat and drink.The main reason why decisions about ¡°consuming¡± have come to dominate our lives today is that we now live in a world in which we are surrounded by choices.Think about what life was like for a teenage girl in a Korean village in the 18th century. She would seldom have reason to wonder what kind of food would be consumed in her next meal. The daily diet was relatively unchanging. Nor would she think much about what kind of work she would be engaged in for the rest of her life. Chances are she would not even be confronted with a lot of choice about who her husand might be, or whether she would bear children or not. And it is very unlikely that she would think deeply about which religion she would affiliate with.A girl of her age today, living in Seoul or some other major city, would be faced with a wide range about these matters. If she confines herself to a rather consistent daily diet, that is still a choice that she makes. She will likely think about the issues of marriage and family, and even about where she will live. She will consider various vocational goals, and programs of training that lead to those goals. She will give some thought to where she will live eventually—and that might even involve deciding whether she will remain in Korea or live elsewhere.Needless to say, she will also be faced with choices about religious affiliation. Unlike her counterpart of two centuries ago, she has many possibilities to choose from—different religions, different groups and denominations within various religions; and, of course, the possibility of no religious affiliation at all.It does no good simply to criticize all of this as ¡°consumerism,¡± as if that a bad thing. Many young people today think much, for example, about where they will pursue their university studies. In a sense, that is a choice about what kind of education they will ¡°consume.¡± But that kind of choice can be exciting, one of the blessings of living in our contemporary world.Similarly, the opportunity to choose one¡¯s religious affiliation can also be viewed as a blessing. Indeed, when Horace and Lillias Underwood came to Korea in the 1880s, they were intent upon introducing religious choice into Korean villages where it previously did not exist. When they came on the scene here, for example, suddenly people were faced with a decision that previously they had not known—whether to follow the Way of Jesus or to continue in the practices of tradtional Korean religions. That arrival of ¡°consumerism¡± into Korean life was, we believe, a marvelous blessing, for which we thank God and honor those who heard his call to spread the Gospel in this land.What has changed in more recent times, of course, is the array of religious choices with which we are now confronted. But whether it is a young person in a 19th century village choosing beween Jesus and Buddha, or whether it is someone today examining many different religious perspectives in our highly pluralistic religious culture, the stakes are the same. The choice that the sociologist describes in terms of the rather lifeless term, ¡°religious affiliation,¡± is in fact the most important decision a human being can make. It is a choice about how we are to fulfill our deepest needs as persons who are created in God¡¯s image and likeness. For many Christians, having responded to God¡¯s gracious offer of salvation in Jesus Christ, the choice of which church to join is also an important one. Many parents, for example, may be content with their own traditional patterns of worship, but they know that their children are turned off by those patterns. So they look for something that the whole family can commit to. They are struggling to find resources that will help them deal with some of the most profound and intimate issues of their lives.This brings me to my second piece of counsel from the Apostle Paul. I have already quoted him as saying, in I Corinthians 9, that we must ¡°be all things to all people.¡± But in Ephesians 4: 15 he says that, ¡°speaking the truth in love, we must grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ.¡±We might think of the Apostle here as issuing a ¡°maturity mandate.¡± The church is a place where spiritual growth has to take place. And there are many aspects of our present day cultural climate that make the task of bringing people to maturity in the faith somewhat difficult.A Korean friend of mine was telling me recently about what he sees as significant changes in family life in recent years in South Korea. Young people, he observed, are waiting longer to get married. In fact, some of them decide not to get married at all. They often move from relationship to relationship. I found the image that he used in describing this pattern to be interesting. ¡°There are many younger Koreans,¡± he said, ¡°who simply keep shopping around for relationships. They see no need to stay committed to anyone for the long run. When they tire of one relationship they simply look for another one.¡±The ¡°shopping around¡± image that he used is, of course, the same one that is used to describe the ways in which many Christians treat the worship experience. They have no ¡°brand loyalty.¡± For a while they may be content in one congregation, but if they find that the experience no longer satisfies those immediate needs, they shop around for another church.The dangers are the same in both situations. Shopping around can be a way of avoiding the making of commitments. It is one thing to care so deeply about one¡¯s relationship to God that you make an honest effort to find a place where you can grow in Christ. But it is another thing to focus so narrowly on immediately satisfying what you see as your spiritual needs that you refuse to work hard at making a commitment to a specific community.¡°Shopping around¡± for a life partner can be a way of taking marriage very seriously. But it can also be a way of engaging in self-indulgence, of looking for something new each time a relationship might require some effort to sustain. Similarly, looking carefully for the right kind of church can be a very serious matter. We want to be sure we make the right choice because once we make that choice we know we have to stay committed, for better or for worse, in sickness and in health. But shopping around for a church can also be something we do because we don¡¯t care about ccommitments. We simply go from one church relationship to another, changing brands at the first sign that staying committed will require a serious effort on our part.One of the most widely read academic books in recent decades in the United States was written by a team of sociologists headed up by Robert Bellah, who taught for many years at the University of California in Berkeley. The book had the title, Habits of the Heart, and its subtitle highlighted the theme that is is relevant to the church-shopping topic: ¡°Individualism and Commitment in American Life.¡± The Bellah team conducted many extensive interviews with people, and on that basis gave a detailed account of the individualism that has, in recent years, come to characterize American culture at large. They offered as an example of this individualism their much-cited story of a woman named Sheila Larson, who told the interviewers that she follows the dictates of a religion that she described as ¡°Sheilaism¡±—a religion that centered on her own needs and desires. The basic teaching of this religion is, as Sheila put it, ¡°just try to love yourself and be gentle with yourself,¡± and building on that foundation Sheila also saw a need to love and be gentle with those who were closest to her. Bellah and his colleagues saw this kind of individualism as standing in sharp contrast to more traditional ways of viewing the individual¡¯s relationship to the larger world, an understanding of reality wherein the individual is obligated to subordinate individual interests to the wellbeing of the larger community, and especially in the obligation to devote one¡¯s life to the greater glory of God. The Bellah team observed that the ways in which the persons that they interviewed described their lives provided clear evidence that the older language of commitment and self-sacrifice was diminishing. That was being replaced by two other languages. One is the language of ¡°cost-benefit analysis,¡± where a person decides what to do on the basis of what will bring them the most personal pleasure or profit. The other is the language of language of ¡°self actualization,¡± where people talk about becoming more authentic, emphasizing the need for a continuing ¡°personal growth.¡±In one of their case studies, the Bellah team described a man who who had remarried after his first marriage had ended in divorce. He expressed regret about the way he had treated his first wife. He had been so committed to advanciing his career, he said, that he had neglected his relationship with his wife. In his new marriage, however, things were very different. In this relationship, he was concentrating on his own growth as a well-rounded human being. He talked about how much he enjoyed being with his wife, about how she made him ¡°feel more real¡± as a person. The interviewers asked him some probing questions. Suppose your wife was in a terrible accident, and became physically disabled? Suppose she was no longer ¡°fun¡± to be with? Suppose from that point on that you had to take care of her with very little personal reward from the relationship? Would you still be committed to her?The man had a difficult time expressing himself at this point. It was clear that he wanted to say that he would stay committed to his wife under those difficult conditions, but he lacked the language to express that commitment. Talking in terms of a personal ¡°cost-benefit analysis¡± did not allow him to express his commitment. Neither was it helpful simply to talk about ¡°personal growth.¡±What the sociologists were getting at is that commitment to a relationship with another person often requires us to stay faithful even when there are not individual benefits, or chances to have ¡°fun¡± with that person. Real commitment often requires categories that go beyond self-interest, beyond the meeting of personal needs. The man they had interviewed somehow knew this in his deep places, but he lacked the language to express himself. This led the Bellah team to make an important observation. One of the few places in our culture where the older ways of speaking are preserved, they said, is in places of religious worship. Churches and synagogues, they argued, serve today as ¡°communities of memory.¡± They are places where traditional worldviews, reinforced by the language of commitment and the larger purposes of our individual lives, continue to be an important cultural influence.This leads me to some practical observations about our worshiping life today. I am open to new patterns of worship, especially when they speak to a new generation, facing new cultural realities. But it is also important to function as communities where commitment is nurtured and memories are preserved. With those requirements in mind, I will make some observations about some aspects of worship that I consider to be essential.My first observation is this: when we gather for worship we enter into a special kind of sacred space, where we are called to examine the claims that the larger culture places upon us. The psalmist illustrates this requirement in a very dramatic way in Psalm 73. He describes a very difficult period in his life, a time when he had wandered away from the path of obedience to God. He reports that he had gotten into a frame of mind where he had begun to admire the wicked. He envied arrogant people who had become prosperous in devious ways. He began to revere physically seductive people, as well as those who had made great social gains by the use of violence. The psalmist tells us that he even got to the point where he started to ask himself whether it was a big mistake to try to keep his heart clean. Maybe, he thought, the wicked have the right answers to the basic issues of life.This mood of rebellion took over his life, he tells us. But all of this changed when something dramatic happened. Here is how he puts it. Liviing my life, he says, ¡°seemed to me a wearisome task, until I went into the sanctuary of God.¡± Then, he testified. ¡°I perceived their end¡±—he realized the direction in which the wicked were heading. Their feet, he says, have been set ¡°in slippery places,¡± and they are ready to ¡° fall to ruin.¡±In attending church, the psalmist had a worldview change. He had been surrounded by the values and claims of an ungodly culture, and he had been lured into thinking about life in those terms. But then he entered into a very different place. In the sanctuary of the Lord he encountered a different reality. He heard a call to distance himself from a rebellious culture, to say ¡°No¡± to the definitions of reality that were being impressed upon him in his daily life. In the sanctuary of the Lord he experienced the truth of the world and the one who rules over the world.I read a story a while back in a Catholic magazine about some young men who belonged to the ¡°underground Catholic church¡± in China, a group of Catholic believers who secretly gathered each week to celebrate the Catholic mass in defiance of the Chinese government¡¯s ban on Catholic churches that refuse to register with the government. A group of Catholics in the United States arranged for these young men to come to American for university studies. The first Sunday after these young men arrived in America, they attended worship services at the Catholic congregation that was sponsoring their studies. They were so offended by what they experienced that they refused ever to worship their again. This congregation took a very informal approach to worship. Their priest was dressed casually. The congregation did not follow a formal liturgy very closely. When the time came for the Lord¡¯s supper, everyone stood around in a circle and passed a loaf of bread, each breaking off a piece, and they drank from a very plain goblet of wine. In China the young men had been a part of a worshiping community that met in a cave. But that cave was filled with reminders of a very different sort of world than the one from which they entered the cave. The priest wore traditonal vestments. The Mass was conducted in formal Latin, with the worshipers softly chanting their prayers. People took communion by kneeling at an altar rail. Candles were burning and the smoke of incense filled the air.What they saw in the American worship service was very different. The whole point of the service was to eliminate any sense that there was a big difference between the church and the surrounding culture. The young Chinese men were deeply offended. They did not want a church service that looked and surrounded just like the world outside.Their negative reaction was extreme. But the basic concern that they expressed is a legitimate one. Like the psalmist, we live in a culture that presents us on a daily basis with images of ¡°¡±success¡± and ¡°the good life¡± that stand in sharp contrast to the Way of the Cross. On television, in film, on the internet, and in print journalism, we are encouraged to admire people whose way of life is far removed from the kind of relationships and pursuits for which we were designed by our Creator.This does not mean that church should be an escape from the surrounding culture. What we say and do in our worship services should make it clear to all who are present that we know what is happening in the larger world. The church must communicate its message in a culturally-relevant manner. But in all of that we must make it clear that when we enter the place of worship we are moving into a special kind of sacred space where the noises of the world are silenced in the presence of the Living God who calls us to praise him, to confess our sin, and to hear anew what it means to walk the path of discipleship.My second observation is this: the worshiping church must be a place of remembering. The Bellah team¡¯s ¡°community of memory¡± theme is a crucial one. In our culture of self-actualizaton and self-indulgence, it is important that entering the church serves as a place where we are reminded of other times and other places where people have sought to be faithful to the cause of the Gospel.A few years ago I read a story on the religion page of a newspaper about a pastor who organizes his services around popular secular show tunes. He would use these as a springboard for a dialogue with the gathered worshipers about various lines in the songs. The pastor admitted that some worshipers were not happy with this approach. They wanted some traditional hymns sung in their worship services, and they would ask him, ¡°How¡¯s this got anything to do with religion?¡± To which he would respond: ¡°If you are sitting in church for an hour, reciting words and singing hymns you hardly know, what¡¯s that got to do with religion?¡±This pastor was confused. The hymns of the past are the shorthand poetic records of the spiritual and theological memories of the Christian church. We should certainly encourage new generations of Christians to compose and sing new hymns, ones that preserve their own spiritual and theological experiences. But we cannot ignore the riches that are readily available in those hymns that record the memories of those who have walked the paths of discipleship in the past. But singing the thoughts of the church must also be accompanied by the preaching and teaching of the Word of God. We Presbyterians have a unique theological understanding of God¡¯s marvelous ways of reaching out to sinful human beings in sovereign grace. Not everyone—not even all Christians—will like our way of explaining what the Gospel of Jesus Christ is all about. We cannot expect to attract everyone to our way of being the church. To be sure, we must find new ways of bringing our message to a new and challenging culture. We must be ¡°all things to all human beings, so that some might be saved.¡± In doing so, however, we cannot forget what we have learned in the past about what it means together to ¡°grow up in every way¡± into the fulness of what Christ offers to all of us. I cannot help but add that this growing-up in Christ means that we will leave the church with a clear sense of our identity as agents of God¡¯s work in the world. One of the most exciting discussions taking place these days about the church is the idea of the ¡°missional church.¡± We come to church to encounter the living God. But that God sends us forth from the church back into the world to serve him. The worship service must also be a place where we receive instructions for that sending-out. And this is another way in which sensitivity to the culture around us must be present in our times of worship. How do we serve the work of God each day in schools, in homes, in the marketplace, in the world of entertainment, in the arts, in politics and social service.? These are not optional questions for Presbyterians. We know that we are worshiping a sovereign Lord who cares deeply about the world he has created. Worship must be an occasion for our coming to understand better the heart of God for the renewal of all of life. For ¡°God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him¡± (John 3: 17). And God calls us together in worship, not only to assure us of the forgiveness that he has offered us through Jesus Christ, but also to strengthen us to do his work in the creation that he still loves.



2. Reformed Ministry Today: Continuities and DiscontinuitiesRichard J. Mouw

Sometime during the late 1880s Horace and Lillias Underwood met a woman from a village near We Ju who came to them because she was interested in learning more about Christianity. In writing about this encounter, Lillias Underwood reports that the woman did not have access to any biblical writings, or any other Christian literature, But what she had heard about the Gospel was, as Mrs. Underwood puts it, ¡°a tiny morsel of truth¡± that had begun to take ¡°deeper and deeper root in the good ground of her heart.¡± As a result she told the Underwoods that she had come to hold to these three beliefs. The first was that ¡°There is only one God and we must worship no other.¡± The second was that ¡°We must put away our sins, be good and pure and true.¡± And the third: ¡°We must keep one day in seven holy and sing the words, ¡®Yesu We Pee Patkui Umnay¡¯ [Nothing But the Blood of Jesus].¡± Encouraged by the Underwoods to continue in her newfound faith, she went back to her village and told others about Jesus. Several came to faith in Christ—including a man who had been known as a very wicked person. After a while the little group was able to obtain Bibles, catechisms and hymnbooks. Eventually a church was built and after several years hundreds were attending worship services there. This se quence of events nicely illustrates what the Westminster Confessions lays out as the two most important features of the church¡¯s mission: ¡°Unto this catholic visible Church,¡± it says, ¡°Christ hath given the ministry, oracles, and ordinances of God, for the gathering and perfecting of the saints¡¦¡± The Westminster Confession is making it clear here that everything that the church does—all of the things that are a part of its ¡°ministry, oracles and ordinances¡±—must serve these two basic goals of ¡°gathering and perfecting.¡± If we fail to work for those goals, all of the other churchly activities do not really count for much. The church must gather people into the Body of Christ by proclaiming the basic truths of the Gospel. And the church must also find ways of ¡°perfecting the saints.¡± It was not enough for those early Korean Christians simply to sing about the blood of Jesus. They needed to be instructed in the deeper truths of the Christian faith.These goals of ¡°gathering and perfecting¡± the people of God are not easy ones to achieve today. Ministry has become increasingly complex, for a least two general reasons. One is the increasingly complex roles that ministers are expected to perform. Recently I came across an old book that described the work of a pastor as preaching and visiting the sick. That does not begin to do justice to the work of the typical pastor in our day. Congregational ministry has developed many areas of specialization that were not on the agenda even a few decades ago. A minister today has see to it that someone is serving the special needs of young people, of single persons, and of people experiencing the pain of divorce. Church members today are expecting their congregations to be administered well. They demand accountability for the ways in which we make use of our financial and human resources. The other reason for the new complexity in the work of ministry is the new cultural realities. Church members today are much more likely to speak openly about their family conflicts, their sexual temptation, their financial worries and their work-related tensions—and they expect their pastors to address such matters. Though film, television, the internet, magazines and newspapers, Christians today are exposed in unprecedented ways to different religious and cultural perspectives, and to different moral codes and lifestyles, and they expect their pastors to be conversant with these realities. Several years ago I heard a Mennonite woman tell about what it was like to grow up in a rural Mennonite community in Pennsylvania. There were no formal requirements in those days for preparation for pastoral ministry and the pastors were chosen by the casting of lots. When an older pastor died, or was otherwise made incapable of performing his duties, the community would gather to choose his successor. This was always a very tense affair, she reported. All of the men in the community were farmers, and typically none of them really wanted to give up their fulltime farming activities in order to take on pastoral responsibilities. The men were clearly nervous when the lots were case, and the announcing of the person who had been chosen to become the pastor was a dramatic moment. The men in her community were not the types to show strong emotions, she said. But the choosing of a new pastor was the one time that she could remember when she would see a Mennonite farmer shed tears in public. And, she quickly added. they were not tears of joy!I know many pastors today who shed tears—in private, at least—about the burdens of ministry. And these are men and women who were not chosen by the casting of lots. They experienced a clear call from the Lord to ministry, and they willingly engaged in an extensive and costly educational program to prepare themselves for their duties. But over and over again I hear reports that their courses of study in theological schools did not prepare them for what they actually face today in ministry.Of course, those kinds of laments have always been expressed. Often in the past they have taken the form of complaints about the things that do or do not get taught in theological schools. And typically these criticisms have had at least some element of legitimacy. There is a constant temptation in theological education for scholars to pursue interests that are not very helpful to those who face the very real challenges that must be wrestled with on the front lines of ministry.But it is not enough for theological educators to change the content of their courses. The fact is that it is no longer possible to prepare adequately for a pastoral ministry simply by going through a standard theological degree program. Theological schools should not cut back on the traditional subjects of biblical scholarship, church history and systematic theology. At the same time there are so many new subjects that need to be taught if pastors today are to be prepared well for their ministry—counseling methods, sexual ethics, political thought, gender relations, church finances, administration, conflict management, and many, many more. These topics cannot all be covered in a standard academic program for ministry preparation. There is a need for continuing education, special seminars, conferences, small group discussions among pastors, and so on. We are facing important new challenges for our understanding of how we are to organize the life and mission of our congregations.An important scholarly study that is now receiving considerable attention right now in the Christian community in the United States is Stephen Ellingson¡¯s 2007 book, Megachurch and the Mainline: Remaking Religious Tradition in the Twenty-first Century. In this study, Ellingson, a sociologist, provides in-depth accounts of the ways in which nine Lutheran congregations in the San Francisco area are responding to new challenges for the church¡¯s life and mission. While each of the congregations has its own unique character, Ellingson sees two very different patterns being explored. Borrowing terminology from the sociologist Robert Bellah and his colleagues—I discussed their work in my previous lecture—he sees some congregations attempting to be ¡°communities of memory,¡± while others are promoting a model associated with ¡°communities of interest.¡± The community of interest pattern is influenced by ¡°megachurches,¡± such as the Willowcreek and Saddleback congregations, where there is no longer any conscious intention to preserve a traditional denominational or confessional identity. The congregation¡¯s life and mission are designed to serve the actual interests, the felt needs, of persons for whom that kind of traditional identity has no real meaning or attraction. A non-Christian who visits such a congregation will experience music, stories and concepts that are much like what characterizes their surrounding culture. All of this is a part of a deliberate strategy for encouraging the person to receive the Christian message in terms that are very familiar to them. This is what we have come to know as ¡°seeker-sensitive worship.¡± This stands in contrast a community of memory church where worship embodies tradtions that not well known in the larger culture. The community of interest model has been getting some criticism recently, both from leaders in the mainline denominations and from a younger generation who are associated with the newer ¡°emerging church¡± movement. They argue that the integrity of the Gospel requires that people who come to church be invited into an active worshiping community, one that takes seriously the teachings and practices of the Christian tradition, and that our worship spaces much feature symbols that foster an experience of transcendence.Indeed, Willow Creek itself has taken a critical look at its own effectiveness in ministry. In a recent study that they have published, Reveal, which has been widely discussed, they report that there is a significant portion of their membership who have complained that their spiritual growth has been ¡°stalled¡± in the Willow Creek context. This has led the Willow Creek leadership to conclude that their church members should not expect all of their spiritual needs to be met within the life of the church. Those who are looking for greater spiritual maturity need to realize that "much of the responsibility for their spiritual growth belongs to them" as individuals. The church has limits to what it ¡°can and should deliver," the report says. People who come to Willow Creek need to be told ¡°early on in their journey that they need to look beyond the church to grow."In a recent editorial, the editors of Christianity Today commended the Willow Creek leadership for their willingness to tak an honest look at what they are or are not accomplishing in their ministry. But the editors also criticize the Willow Creek study on several key points. They note that the Reveal report describes the church ¡°as if it were merely a distribution point for spiritual goods and services.¡± This, they say, ¡°suggests a disturbingly low view of the church.¡± Quoting Ephesians 4, the editors observe that the Apostle Paul insists that the important spiritual growth that leads to maturity in Christ must take place within the life of the church. This does not mean, the editorial says, that it is bad for people need to engage on their own in the personal spiritual disciplines of prayer, Bible study, and the like. But the Willow Creek report fails to acknowledge ¡°that these spiritual disciplines are intrinsically grounded in the ongoing life of the church.¡± I agree with the basic point made by the Christianity Today editors about the church¡¯s role in promoting spiritual growth. This emphasis on nurturing growth in Christ in the life of the church is of great importance for Christian witness today. I want to illustrate that importance in my time here today by making several observations about what this means for ministry.I must say, though, that we do need to be willing to learn some lessons about ministry from the megachurches, even if we also want to criticize them on some key issues. For example, we in the Presbyterian/Reformed tradition have some good theological reasons for taking more seriously the emphasis on ¡°seeker-sensitive¡± patterns in our church life. In fact, we can even look to John Calvin himself for positive encouragement on this subject. I am thinking of two closely related theological themes that Calvin introduces in the Institutes for understanding the indelibly spiritual character of human existence, even in its fallen condition: the sense of divinity (sensus divinitatis) and the seed of religion (semen religionis). All human beings, Calvin says, have a sense of the divine, whether they consciously acknowledge it or not. This is due to the fact that God has planted the seed of religion in every human heart. Human beings, even sinful human beings, yearn for God. As St. Augustine put it in the form of a prayer at the beginning of his Confessions: ¡°Thou hast made us for thyself and our hearts are restless until they find rest in Thee.¡± A more popular spiritual formulation of this same point is captured in this wonderful line in the Christmas carol, ¡°O Little Town of Bethlehem¡±: ¡°The hopes and fears of all the years are met in thee tonight.¡± This is what both Augustine and Calvin are encouraging us to think about: the ways in which the basic hopes and fears of the human heart, even the sinful human heart, are in some way fulfilled in the redemptive ministry of Jesus Christ.To be sure, the yearnings of the sinful human heart are fundamentally mis-directed. As John Calvin put it: ¡°The human heart is a factory of idols¡¦Everyone of us is, from his mother¡¯s womb, expert in inventing idols.¡± When, because of our sinful rebellion, we cut ourselves off from a vital relationship with our Creator, we seek to satisfy our hopes and calm our fears by putting our ultimate trust in something creaturely, in something that is less than the true God. But it precisely because we are created for fellowship with the Living God that our idols never really satisfy our deepest yearnings. Our hearts are restless until they rest in the Living God.Suppose, then, we ask the question that the sociologist Ellingson is posing in his book about megachurches and traditional churches. Should we attempt to be communities of interest or communities of memory? The Reformed answer, it seems to me, is that we must focus on both. The experienced ¡°needs¡± of the unbelievers whom we want to reach with the Gospel are themselves expressions of deep, although certainly misdirected, yearnings that are planted by God in their hearts. This does not mean, of course, that we simply take at face value the ways in which those persons describe their needs. We must identify the real nature of those needs by probing beneath the surface for the underlying God-implanted yearnings that give rise to what appears on the surface. In my book, Distorted Truth, which has appeared in a Korean-language edition, I use an extreme example to illustrate this point. I once heard a speaker quote a Roman Catholic writer as saying that the man who knocks on the door of a house of prostitution is looking for God. At first I was shocked by this suggestion, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized that it was a profound observation. Obviously the statement should not be taken as meaning that the man who approaches the house of prostitution hopes that God will be the one who opens the door. The real message is that people who are looking for ultimate fulfillment in the quest for sexual pleasure or wealth or power or any other element or aspect of creation will not find it in any of these things. The Westminster Shorter Cathecism makes the point clearly: our chief end as human beings is to glorify God and to enjoy him forever. Nothing brings genuine fulfillment to the human spirit than an obedient relationship with our Creator.When we think, then, about the experienced ¡°needs¡± of unbelievers in our own day, it is important that we recognize that those needs, those quests and longings, are not wrong in themselves. Rather, they are misdirected. People who are trapped in sinful lives are looking in the wrong places to find ultimate meaning and true satisfaction. I was asked once by a Roman Catholic theologian to write a few paragraphs for a book of short reflections on what it means to ¡°know God.¡± In my contribution I told about a bumper sticker that I had seen on a car on a highway in California. In the United States people often put messages on the bumpers of their cars, telling the world what they believe about some subject or another. I usually do not find these messages very profound, but this time I actually liked the theology of the bumper sticker that I saw. It said, "You are a child of God. Please call home." That is actually a good answer to the question of what it means to find God and to come to know his will for our lives.The image of ¡°returning home¡± is a good biblical picture of conversion. It is a prominent theme in many of the evangelical hymns of the past, as in ¡°Softly and tenderly, Jesus is calling, calling, ¡®O sinner, come home.¡¯¡±In an essay that he published over a half-century ago, the German philosopher Martin Heidegger predicted that ¡°[h]omelessness is coming to be the destiny of the world.¡± Heidegger wasn't thinking so much of the very literal homelessness that we see in so many of in our cities today. Rather, he was prophesying about a growing sense of aimlessness in human life—the kind of loss of a sense of belonging that is so much a part of what is referred to these days as the "postmodern" experience. When the new-style congregations emphasize the importance of welcoming ¡°seekers,¡± then, they are pointing all of us to something important. We need to see our congregations as places of safety, as spaces into which we can invite wandering sinners to come home to the Living God. And we in the Reformed/Presbyterian tradition need to be willing to learn important lessons from those newer congregations about how best to welcome this new generation seekers. We do need to think new thoughts, in the new cultural situations in which we find ourselves, about the tone and atmosphere of our worshiping life and about the kind of language that best communicates the truths of God¡¯s Word to people who desperately need to hear the Good News of the Savior was sent to minister to ¡°the hopes and fears of all the years.¡±Recently I read a discussion of preaching where the writer referred to Karl Barth¡¯s well known insistence that sermons should not have either introductions or conclusions. Barth was convinced that introducing these elements into our sermons is motivated by a desire to establish a ¡°point of contact,¡± a ¡°common ground,¡± with those to whom the sermon is addressed. This motive, Barth argued, is theologically confused. We must simply proclaim the text. The Word of God will make its own connection to the hearts of the hearers. The Holy Spirit does not need our help in making the message of God¡¯s Word ¡°relevant¡± to innermost regions of the human spirit. Barth goes so far as to label as ¡°heresy¡± any effort on the part of a preacher to provide introductions and conclusions to the proclamation of the text. All of this was described by the writer that I read, who was giving an account of Barth¡¯s view of preaching. I did not doubt that he was giving an accurate picture of Barth¡¯s views, but I decided to re-read Barth on the subject, to refresh my own memory by looking directly at Barth¡¯s discussion. And indeed Barth does say all of the things that the writer attributed to him. But I was glad to see that there was more. In preparing our sermons, Barth says, we do need to consider ¡°the situation in which the congregation is placed.¡± We must preach to them, Barth says, ¡°in a way that they will understand.¡± The preacher ¡°must know them as individuals; he must be acquainted with the conditions which shape their lives, with their capacities, and their potentialities for good and evil. Only so will he find the means to touch their hearts so that the Word may have significance for them.¡± A preacher, says, must be careful not to deliver a sermon that is ¡°simply a monologue, magnificent perhaps, but not necessarily helpful to the congregation.¡± In preparing the sermon, ¡°those to whom he is going to speak must constantly be present in the mind of the preacher.¡± Thinking about the actual life situation of the hearers ¡°will suggest unexpected ideas and associations which will be with [the preacher] in the study of the text.¡± This means, Barth says, that the preacher¡¯s preparartion will ¡°provide the element of actuality, the application of [the chosen] text to the contemporary situation.¡± Whatever Barth meant by not looking for a ¡°point of contact,¡± he was not suggesting that we should ignore the life-situations of those to whom we preach.We can be certain, then, that both John Calvin and Karl Barth want us to take seriously in our worshiping practices the actual struggles of the people who attend our services, including the underlying hopes and fears that are at work in the deep places of their hearts. But, having invoked the authority of Calvin and Barth, I must also appeal to the authority of my own favorite theologian, the great Dutch statesman Abraham Kuyper.Earlier I said that I endorse the views of the Christianity Today editorial that insisted that our spiritual nurture must be grounded primarily in the life of the local church. At first glance this might seem to conflict with the views of Abraham Kuyper, who encouraged the flourishing of a variety of Christian organizations beyond the boundaries of the institutional church: the Christian schools, the Christian political party, the Christian farming organization, the Christian art guild, and so on. There is certainly a way of understanding Kuyper¡¯s perspective that sees it as diminishing the role of the local church. And this downplaying of the importance of the institutional church has often loomed large among many of Kuyper¡¯s followers. But I believe that is a mistaken interpretation. In his day Kuyper could take the strength of the local church for granted. People were thoroughly immersed in the worshiping and teaching ministries of the local church. When they went off from the church to their involvement in Christian political witness, Christian farming discussions, and the like, they took with them that very robust Calvinist vision that had nurtured and formed their faith in the life of the local congregation.In Kuyper¡¯s day, he knew that the larger culture was strongly influenced by Christian teaching. Reformed people spent much time in church, and they took the teachings of the church with them into other areas of their lives. This is no long the case in the Netherlands, or in the United States. And it is certainly not the case in Korea. A primary need for the Christian community today, then, is the nurturing of a Christian identity. In our postmodern pluralistic cultures there are many other forces at work that attempt to shape our identities. We need to work very hard at forming Christian identity, and that hard work must take place within the life of the church. It is in the church where the Word is preached, the sacraments are offered, and where we are pointed to the way of discipleship. Whatever our church members may experience in other contexts, such as retreat centers, prayer breakfasts, small group study groups, and organizatons that promote discipleship in various occupational settings, these experiences—as important as they may be—must be fed by the sense of our identity in Christ that is nurtured in the life of the local congregation.But I would not be faithful to my Kuyperian allegiances if I did not also insist that our worshiping life must include a sending-out of God¡¯s people into the world, to serve him there as agents of his Kingdom. As I was working on this lecture, someone showed me the Korean website of an ¡°antiChrist¡± group who are severely critical of the Korean churches, and who want to ban the teaching of the Bible to Korean children. This is a terrible thing, and I have no doubt that their criticisms of the practices of pastors and congregations are very unfair. In the English-speaking world we have also been under attack from what are known as ¡°the new atheists,¡± who criticize Christian beliefs and attitudes.We certainly need to defend our Chrsitian worldview against these critics. But I am convinced that in the long run, the best way of responding to these attacks is for Christians to make a new effort to function in a Christ-like way in the larger culture. The critics see pastors and other Christian leaders as motivated by a desire to enhance their own power. We can counter this impression by demonstrating our love for the larger society by encouraging our people to work alongside of their fellow citizens and fellow workers to promote the common good of the larger culture. There is a solid biblical basis for this. In Jeremiah 29, the people of Israel had been carried off into captivity in pagan Babylon. They no longer had their own temple or their own godly rulers. They were now living in a culture where there was much rebellion against God¡¯s design for human life. The Israelites are confused: How can they live as God¡¯s people in this new cultural situation? The prophet Jeremiah then brings them a word from the Lord. After telling them that they are to build houses, plant vineyards, and marry off their sons and daughters so that they might ¡°multiply¡± in the land, he brings this striking command from God: ¡°seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare.¡±This is an important message for Reformed Christians today. I have argued elseswhere that there is a pietist strand in Calvinism that in its most extreme form can take on an Anabaptist tone, treating the church as a place where we come to escape from the influences of the larger world. We do indeed need to experience an alternative reality when we come to church—the reality of a sacred space where Jesus Christ rules in a very direct and open way. But as Kuyper rightly proclaimed in his famous manifesto, Jesus Christ cries out, ¡°This is mine!¡± over every square inch of the creation. And God¡¯s people must serve him there, ¡°seeking the welfare¡± of all of the square inches that belong to him. This too, then, is a way in which worship must take our everyday life seriously. In church we are reminded of what our true identity is as we enter into the presence of the Most High God. And it is in that worshiping community that we must experience in a very special way the nurture and growth that will enable us to serve our Lord each day as agents of his Kingdom in the larger culture. To use the sociologist¡¯s terminology again, the church is a place where our Christian ¡°memories¡± and the ¡°interests¡± of our surrounding culture interact. I now want to offer some practical counsel about how this interaction can be displayed in a healthy way in our worshiping life.At the risk of over-generalizing, I think that, roughly speaking, it is fair to say that the younger generation of Christians—who are themselves often ¡°seekers¡± of sorts—are the ones who care most about a church that is relevant to the culture in which they are immersed. They want church music that is conversant with those cultural realities, and ways of preaching that speaks to the challenges that they face in our postmodern culture. Many of us in the older generation, on the other hand, are ¡°community of memory¡± types. We want the older hymns, and we flourish under the kind of preaching and liturgy that has long nurtured the souls of the faithful. I am regularly asked by those who are in charge of the leading worship: How do we find our way in this time of ¡°worship wars¡±? The issues here are quite complex, but I want to offer one word of advice that I am quite confident about. I am convinced that generational segregation in the churches is not the right answer. There may be good reasons for occasional separate ¡°youth-oriented worship,¡± but on the whole I believe that we need to keep the generations together. This is necessary, as I see it for two reasons. One is the importance of insisting that the older and younger generations stay in dialogue with each other. We need to preserve the memories of the past, and we need to take present day cultural challenges seriously. Both of these needs must shape our worship. It is not a good idea to have one kind of service that focuses on worship and the other on contemporary cultural relevance. Creative attempts must be made at ¡°blended worship,¡± where the old and the new come together is a way that is theologically and liturgically vibrant. One way to keep old and young in dialogue with each other about these things is to find ways for representatives of each group to tell the stories of their own spiritual journeys. Rather than arguing with each other about the kinds of worship we should have, we should llsten to each other as we tell what God has been doing in our lives.The other reason has to do what I have learned from my psychologist colleagues at Fuller Seminary. In their studies of adolescent development they have found that one factor that promotes psychological and spiritual health in young people is regular contact with the older generation. Specifically, studies have shown that a young person has a good chance of having a healthy attitude toward life if he or she regularly interacts with at least four different adults in addition to the young person¡¯s parents. These interactions do not need to be extensive, but they do need to be engaging. Here is a concrete piece of advice offered by one of my psychologist colleagues to those of us in the older generation. Talk regularly to a teenager at church, she urges. Ask them how their week has gone, and ask them if there is something that you can pray for in their life during the next week. And then, a week later, seek them out and ask them how things turn out with that prayer concern. This seemingly minor kind of interaction can be very influential in a young person¡¯s life. And it can mean much to the older person as well. We need friendships between old and young within the Body of Christ. I believe that ¡°the worship wars¡± would calm down significantly if we had more spiritual bonding between the generations. We need to try new things, even taking some risks in those efforts. There is a wonderful image in Revelation 14: 4, where the apostle has a vision of a group of people who ¡°follow the Lamb wherever he goes.¡± We are all on a journey of faith, and we must be willing to follow the Lamb into the future with all of its unknowns, and with all of the changes that need to be made. But this also requires that we do so by preserving the memories of what the Lamb has taught the church in the past. Those of us in the Presbyterian/Reformed tradition are especially blessed with some wonderful theological memories that still speak powerful truths to our present situation. There has never been at time when the restlessness of the human spirit is more obvious than our own, with men and women looking for new ways to bring meaning into their lives. We are heirs to a wonderful theological tradition, one that tells human beings that they cannot find the solutions to life by their own efforts, but that there is a God who comes seeking for his human creatures and inviting them to join a community that is traveling together on an exciting journey of faith.The establishing of this Underwood Lectureship is a wonderful ¡°community of memory¡± project, and it is fitting that we conclude by looking for inspiration to those early Protestant missionaries who first came to Korea. When Horace and Lillias Underwood arrived in Korea 1885, they faced a land that was for them a completely unknown territory. But they were willing to step into the unknown in faith, following the Lamb wherever he was leading them. And they kept at the journey, in the confidence that they would not ever see any cattle on any of a thousand hills who were not put there by the hand of their Creator, and that they would not encounter any human being in any rural compound or village or city who was not created in the image and likeness of the God and Father of Jesus Christ. In spite of all the unknowns and uncertainties that marked their journey, they never doubted that that the inhabitants of the Korean peninsula were people with restless hearts whose deepest longings could only be satisfied by coming to the Cross of Jesus Christ.Through their efforts, the church was planted in Korea, and God raised up gifted Korean leaders who also walked the journey of faith, often at the cost of much sacrifice. And today, the spiritual heirs of those early generations of Christians face new unknown territories here in Korea. These territories are not geographical, but they are strange new contexts for human interaction—the new corporate structures, new technologies, new patterns of family life, new modes of entertainment. But Korean leaders today can also step out in faith, walking into uncharted territory, following the Lamb wherever he goes, in the confidence that the Lamb knows the way into and through the strange and exciting new world of the 21stcentury.


3. A Christian Worldview for a Post-Modern Age Richard J. Mouw

In the 1930s the well-known American poet Edna St. Vincent M
2009-07-03 00:10:06
118.xxx.xxx.92


  • Á¦5ȸ Àü±¹µ¿½ÃÁö¹æ¼±°Å±â°£(5¿ù 20ÀÏ ~ 6¿ù 1ÀÏ)µ¿¾È °Ô½Ã¹° ÀÛ¼ºÀ» ±ÝÁöÇÕ´Ï´Ù. µ¶ÀÚ¿©·¯ºÐÀÇ ¾çÇغÎŹµå¸³´Ï´Ù.

¹øÈ£
Á¦ ¸ñ
ÀÛ¼ºÀÚ
³¯Â¥
Á¶È¸
209
  ÀαÇÁÖÀÏ¿¡   ±èÁ¾Èñ ¸ñ»ç   2009-12-02   3715
208
  ¼±±³Àü·« ¡®Îç.ùÊ¡¯ÇÔ²² ¸ð»ö   ±èÁ¾Èñ¸ñ»ç   2009-11-27   3684
207
  ±³È¸¿Í Çб³   ±èÁ¾Èñ ¸ñ»ç   2009-11-21   3989
206
  Çѱ¹±³È¸ÀÇ À§±â ¹«¾ùÀÌ ¹®Á¦;Àΰ¡?   ±èÁ¾Èñ ¸ñ»ç   2009-11-15   4131
205
  Á¦46ȸ ¾ð´õ¿ìµå Çмú°­Á µÑ° ³¯ 9¿ù6ÀÏ ÁÖÃÖ:»õ¹®¾È±³È¸   ±èÁ¾Èñ ¸ñ»ç   2009-10-18   3897
204
  Á¦46ȸ ¾ð´õ¿ìµå Çмú°­Á ù°³¯ 9¿ù 5ÀÏ ÁÖÃÖ »õ¹®¾È±³È¸   ±èÁ¾Èñ ¸ñ»ç   2009-10-18   4122
203
  Á¦ 46ȸ ¾ð´õ¿ìµå Çмú°­Á ù°³¯ 9¿ù 5ÀÏ ÁÖÃÖ:»õ¹®¾È±³È¸   ±èÁ¾Èñ ¸ñ»ç   2009-10-16   3782
202
  ¼±±³»ç°¡ ¿À±âÀü   ±èÁ¾Èñ ¸ñ»ç   2009-08-02   4956
201
  ±ò¹ð500Áֳ⠱â³ä¼¼¹Ì³ª   ±èÁ¾Èñ ¸ñ»ç   2009-07-03   4045
200
  Á¦1ȸ ¾ð´õ¿ìµÎ ±¹Á¦Çмú½ÉÆ÷Áö¾ö(¿ø¹®)1°­ 2°­ 3°­   ±èÁ¾Èñ ¸ñ»ç   2009-07-03   4427
199
  Á¦2ȸ ¾ð´õ¿ìµå ±¹Á¦Çмú ½ÉÆ÷Áö¾ö   ±èÁ¾Èñ ¸ñ»ç   2009-06-15   4911
198
  Á¦2ȸ ¾ð´õ¿ìµå ±¹Á¦Çмú ½ÉÆ÷Áö¾ö   ±èÁ¾Èñ ¸ñ»ç   2009-06-15   4949
197
  ³»°¡ ÀØÀ» ¼ö ¾ø´Â Ȳ±¤Àº ¸ñ»ç´Ô 4.   ±èÁ¾Èñ¸ñ»ç   2009-06-13   3903
196
  ³»°¡ ÀØÀ» ¼ö ¾ø´Â Ȳ±¤Àº ¸ñ»ç´Ô 3.   ±èÁ¾Èñ ¸ñ»ç   2009-06-13   4344
195
  ³»°¡ ÀØÀ» ¼ö ¾ø´Â Ȳ±¤Àº ¸ñ»ç´Ô 2.   ±èÁ¾Èñ ¸ñ»ç   2009-06-13   3900
194
  ³»°¡ ÀØÀ» ¼ö ¾ø´Â Ȳ±¤Àº ¸ñ»ç´Ô 1.   ±èÁ¾Èñ ¸ñ»ç   2009-06-13   5151
193
  ±ò¹ð500Áֳ⠱â³ä Çмú¼¼¹Ì³ª   ±èÁ¾Èñ ¸ñ»ç   2009-05-31   4384
192
  Á¦1ȸ ¾ð´õ¿ìµå ±¹Á¦½ÉÆ÷Áö¿ò °­ÀÇ 3   ±èÁ¾Èñ ¸ñ»ç   2009-05-21   4235
191
  Á¦1ȸ ¾ð´õ¿ìµå ±¹Á¦½ÃÆ÷Áö¿ò °­ÀÇ 2   ±èÁ¾Èñ ¸ñ»ç   2009-05-21   3935
190
  Á¦1ȸ ¾ð´õ¿ìµå ±¹Á¦½ÉÆ÷Áö¿ò °­ÀÇ 1.   ±èÁ¾Èñ ¸ñ»ç   2009-05-21   4010
Á¦¸ñ ³»¿ë Á¦¸ñ+³»¿ë À̸§
 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 
ȸ»ç¼Ò°³ | ÈÄ¿ø¾È³» | ÀúÀ۱Ǻ¸È£ | ±¤°í¾È³» | Á¦ÈÞ¹®ÀÇ | À̸ÞÀÏÁÖ¼Ò ¹«´Ü¼öÁý°ÅºÎ | °³ÀÎÁ¤º¸Ãë±Þ¹æħ | û¼Ò³âº¸È£Á¤Ã¥
Á¦È£ Å©¸®½ºÃµÀ¥Áø ¼Ò¸® | µî·Ï¹øÈ£ °æ±âµµ¾Æ00217 | µî·Ï¿¬¿ùÀÏ 2009. 7. 3 | ¹ßÇàÀÎ ±èź¹ | ÆíÁýÀÎ ±èź¹
¹ßÇà¼Ò °æ±âµµ ³²¾çÁֽà ¿ÍºÎÀ¾ µµ°î¸® 986-1 µÎ»êÀ§ºê¾ÆÆÄÆ® 101µ¿ 506È£ | ÀüÈ­ ¹× FAX 031-577-9411
û¼Ò³âº¸È£Ã¥ÀÓÀÚ : ±èź¹
Copyright ¨Ï 2007 ¼Ò¸®. All rights reserved. mail to webmaster@cry.or.kr