I highly recommend this work to all who take seriously Paul's metaphor of 'the body of Christ.' Kim interprets the metaphor as an alternative vision of vital reconciling community, over against conceptions that emphasize boundary markers to establish social groups. What is at stake in the interpretation of 1 Corinthians, he argues, is not just the ways first-century Christians constructed and lived out social unity but the consequences of our choices for the way we live out our own responsibilities today. -- David Odell-Scott, Professor of Philosophy, Kent State University (from the book back cover)

Although much has been written on the Pauline notion of the "body of Christ," this contribution by Presbyterian scholar Kim offers a thoughtful and provocative insight worth considering. Kim observes that the Pauline metaphor can be interpreted as setting boundaries or differentiations between the Christian community and those outside. However, if we consider the "body of Christ" as the crucified body of Christ it can be seen as a means of dissolving boundaries and being more inclusive, particularly of those who are pushed to the margins or who suffer. Kim draws out from this key Pauline symbol the implications for the church and society today, particularly in the Gospel call for solidarity with those who are marginalized. --Donald Senior, The Bible Today, 47(2) p.141. (Mar-Apr 2009).

"Thanks also for calling attention to your book on the body of Christ in 1 Corinthians. I read the attachment that you sent, and it sounds like your interpretation and ours are very supportive of each other. I do think the body image is about inclusive egalitarianism in the new life in Christ, and not about sharp social boundaries." -- A message from Marcus Borg (May 21, 2009).

"I’ll add my own encouragement to it–I was at a clergy meeting last week where the question of “the nature of the church” came up, and someone said “well, we’ve all got to strive for unity because we’re the body of Christ,” and I described your book and said that metaphor meant a lot more than just unity. People had never heard the idea before. I hope it revolutionizes our thinking!" -- a Message from Neil Elliott, editor of Fortress Press (May 21, 2009).

"A must-read for every thoughtful Christian familiar with St. Paul’s metaphor of the church as the Body of Christ. Providing an alternate interpretation of this beloved image, Kim reclaims Paul’s vision of the church as an open, reconciling community rather than a closed group. This is as transformative a truth in the 21st century as it was in the first." The United Church of Canada Readings for the Intercultural Church

"Kim, Assistant Professor of New Testament and Early Christianity, Samuel DeWitt Proctor School of Theology of Virginia Union University (Richmond, VA), balances his interest in Jewish and Christian theology with a deep passion for cultural applications of such interests, especially pertaining to groups often marginalized. ... Kim's book might be best served within an academic setting as well as for those desiring to engage with critical issues in Pauline scholarship. While some may disagree with various lines of argument in the book, Kim's overall pleas for the loving embrace of all people in the name of Christ cannot be ignored. Thus, the motivation behind Kim's book will certainly have a bearing on discussions related to Christian mission - both locally and globally." -- Carl S. Sweatman, Stone-Campbell Journal 12 (Fall, 2009) 311-312.

"According to Kim it depends upon how you read Paul's first letter to the Corinthians. If you see the world from the perspective of the church, as hegemonic hierarchy, then you will understand ecumenism to be about unity. The Body of Christ is defined by belief, and boundaries are drawn between believers and non-believers.

For Paul though, according to Kim, the problem is not disunity but conflict between factions. His solution to power conflicts is reconciliation between diverse groups. This is achieved by living the life of Christ crucified rather than through belonging to a church.

Kim says on page 74:

Being united in the same mind and the same purpose is not a matter of belonging to an ecclesiological body, but rather is a matter of having a mind and purpose framed by the same gospel that does not empty the cross of Christ of its power.

For several decades in Britain, perhaps since the 1910 Edinburgh Mission Conference, ecumenism has focused on unity between Christian traditions. A great deal has been achieved in Britain and elsewhere. Besides the various Uniting and United churches there has been a general movement towards reconciliation between traditions. There is more to be done; there remain many people who are not convinced of the value of the ecumenical project. Others point to frequent failures and setbacks. But overall, a great deal of progress has been made. A return to the antagonism between traditions in the past is unthinkable.

But for many younger Christians, this success is closer to absolute. Many Christians no longer think of themselves as members of a single tradition. They work alongside other Christians, without awareness of doctrinal differences. It seems they no longer matter.

Neither the mainstream churches nor the informal congregations of younger Christians can be simply equated to Kim's contrasted understandings of the Body of Christ. What it does suggest though is that future ecumenism may need to focus upon diversity rather than unity. Some ecumenists speak of 'unity in diversity'; perhaps Kim's contrast between unity and reconciliation offers us a clue as to what is at stake." --from Chris Sissons' blog Exploring Ecumenism.

Yung Suk Kim, the author of Christ’s Body in Corinth, writes that “today, God calls people to work for a livable, peaceful world full of diversity and differences.” In defining the conditions and elements in the church community, Professor Kim concludes his investigation by offering a range of considerations aimed at building bridges where relations between churches have become strained. He suggests that people called by God need to create more room for true dialogue between cultures; banish the act and thought of irresponsible individualism; respect differences, engage the other with a self-critical awareness, and care for the other in solidarity and for creation and wonder.-- George O’Neil Urquhart, DMin candidate at Samuel DeWitt Proctor School of Theology, Virginia Union University (project title: “Crisis and Emergency Management and Preparedness for the African American Church Community”).

a response to a book review

Recently, I saw Daniel Christiansen's review of my book (Christ's Body in Corinth) at The Bible and Critical Theory 5.3 (2009) and I appreciate it. I admit his critique of the book's length (slender volume) and less-connectedness of the pictures in the book. However, to be honest, his review is not fair-minded as he labels my interpretation as ideological. The biggest weakness of his review is not to state a main thesis of the book at all; in his review is there no summary or main argument of the book. A typical way of being fair to any book review is to write main points and development of the book, and then to evaluate it critically. But he skipped this part of being fair to the book; instead, he himself becomes ideologically driven, hastily and vehemently rejecting the idea of diversity even without looking at the main argument of the body metaphor that this book argues.

By the way, according to a theory (Althusser Louis in particular), all interpretations are ideological. So is mine and are all others'. What is at stake for anyone's interpretation is not whether his or her reading is ideological or not, but what kind of ideology is operative in interpretation and/or whether that kind of ideology helps us to read the text clearer or healthier than other kind of ideolgy. So it is nothing wrong with reading texts through an ideological lens. But here the problem of his review is not to discuss the book's main points and hastily judge it on the basis of what he believes true while ignoring what the book says entirely. For instance, in his review, he rebuts the idea of "Christic body" by asserting that every community is run by "doctrine or practice." But he is not aware of the book chapters on Community and Body in which various conceptions of the community and different understandings about the body are discussed. So in the book nowhere I am saying there is a community possible without boundaries. Rather, I talk about the role of boundary and the function of Christ's body as a metaphor in the Corinthian context. The question is not whether or not the community is bounded but how the given community functions. In so doing, my book focuses on the roles of the boundary, the conceptions of the community and the different understandings about the body. The real question is which interpretation of the body might be closer to the reality of early Christian life experience in Corinth.

I would welcome any challenge to or critical evaluation of my book if there were a fair balance between what the book really says and what it lacks. I would expect that any reviewer recognizes various approaches to the "body of Christ" discussed in the book, and engages the main argument of the book that lies in the figurative, discursive analysis of 1 Corinthians: an alternative reading of the "body of Christ" understood as a metaphor for a way of life or living (Christic body), on the basis of re-imagination of the "body of Christ" as the crucified body of Christ.

By contrast, Donald Senior's review of my book at The Bible Today clearly states the gist of the book as follows: "Although much has been written on the Pauline notion of the "body of Christ," this contribution by Presbyterian scholar Kim offers a thoughtful and provocative insight worth considering. Kim observes that the Pauline metaphor can be interpreted as setting boundaries or differentiations between the Christian community and those outside. However, if we consider the "body of Christ" as the crucified body of Christ it can be seen as a means of dissolving boundaries and being more inclusive, particularly of those who are pushed to the margins or who suffer. Kim draws out from this key Pauline symbol the implications for the church and society today, particularly in the Gospel call for solidarity with those who are marginalized" (excerpt from Donald Senior's review, The Bible Today 47(2) p.141. Mar-Apr 2009). --Yung Suk Kim