Home > Uncategorized > The Missional Korean-American Church, and East Coast Re-cap

The Missional Korean-American Church, and East Coast Re-cap

Just arrived last night from an epic tw0-week trip to New York, New Jersey, and Northern Virginia. In 95 degree heat and humidity. With two small children in diapers, one with a fever. With a rickety car with leaking AC. In a black suit. And the last leg from Sea-Tac airport to Bellingham (2 hrs) finally took its toll on me; I pulled over in Seattle’s Wallingford district and hurled out the side of the car. It was epic, in a non-Leopold Bloomian way. But I must extend a gracious THANK YOU to my new-found friends in the East: Thank You. And there are other insights. I’ve spent the last few weeks envisioning what a “missional Korean-American church” might look like and

have discovered that the term is not an oxymoron. While in the past I’ve critiqued missional attempts by the KAm church as facile at best I am now in a place to amend that statement and I think the following observation is part of the puzzle:

Of particular interest is the use of the “gooyuk” (listed on page 15 of the course), which traditionally has been the small group model of the first-generation Korean church in North America. Literally translated as “district” group, or “zone” group, this regional perspective on gathering small groups of Christians is particularly relevant to our discussion and must be redeemed by the second and third generation of Korean-American Christians, who have largely tossed this form of small group organization aside in lieu of programmatic aids and Western Bible study materials. The second generation has lost the soul of the Korean church in doing so. Arguably, it is through the “gooyuk” that the potency and relevancy of the Korean church will be re-gained, for there is an implicit decentralization in the act of gathering in this manner, and bounded-set identity gives way to penetration when smaller-groups of Koreans are open to meeting in, praying for, and ministering to, local neighborhoods. If there is one hoped-for outcome of this course, the renewal of the “gooyuk” would be it. And this in tandem together with a strategic mapping out of the regional constituency should poise the church for a new level of missional engagement with the community.

Can an ethnic church be truly missional? Yes I believe so. What are your thoughts

  1. June 23rd, 2010 at 11:31 | #1

    Which KAm church(es) did you visit, Maranatha Grace? I don’t see why any AA churches can’t be missional, as long as the church is driven by the purpose of embodying the missio dei and not veer toward satisfying the sociological needs of people which is typically what these churches do (from my own experience)

  2. June 24th, 2010 at 08:53 | #2

    Hey Steve – I share your feelings.

    The critique is that asian churchgoers often talk about being missional but really only desire to perpetuate ethnic enclaves. I’m willing to give people the benefit of the doubt that the right desires are there, but the pastors are often unable to equip them. In part I blame that on education.

    For too many and too often theological orthodoxy doesn’t lead to orthopraxy. we have too many highly educated asian pastors with very little vision for social engagement – I wish a little more critical pedagogy were intro’d into our seminary curriculums.

  3. Jay Johnson
    June 24th, 2010 at 18:29 | #3

    Glad you’re back, thankful you all came through it all safe.

  4. July 1st, 2010 at 17:01 | #4

    This is really interesting and I appreciate you including these thoughts on your blog (I also hope you’re feeling better!) I’ve always referred to the “gooyuk” in concept because it is what my kore-am church in chicago practiced, but I didn’t know it was an actual philosophy with a name. I do see immense value in it, esp. it’s potential in our current church where there are not enough small groups to satisfy everyone (e.g. everyone is being too darn picky about all of the different small group themes). I’ve often posited to my husband that our old model back in Chicago would just make things “easier” and would call for a more integrated church.

  5. July 2nd, 2010 at 16:10 | #5

    @steph
    I agree Steph – I often wonder about the at-times directionless small groups that we have – arranged around topics – some without a doubt very necessary – and yet the endless topical studies strike me as a bit aimless and influenced by the wind of trend.

    So I like the idea of small group for the purpose of being the church – and the gooyuk has always done that well – and I believe can be even more affective w/ the 2nd gen.

    Some would even go so far as to consider this cell church or house church – I wouldn’t go that far but just see it as a church that takes small groups seriously. Oh and I got your email – give me a few days to mull it over :)

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Switch to our mobile site