This article explores the anatomy of the two critical manifestations of Korean men’s relationality: uiri (의리) and checkimgam (responsibility/책임감). Women’s strong yet neglected relational voices are presented as a way of drawing out and understanding men’s connectional proclivities. The recent historical, political, economical, and cultural context of Korea is also used for a more comprehensive analysis of Korean men’s relaitonality. The Trinitarian existence of God in perichoresis and God’s desire to include us to the divine communal reality provide much meaning into Korean men’s uiri(의리) and checkimgam (responsibility/책임감). Lastly, some spiritual, familial, and social implications of Korean men’s relationality are presented.This article explores the anatomy of the two critical manifestations of Korean men’s relationality: uiri (의리) and checkimgam (responsibility/책임감). Women’s strong yet neglected relational voices are presented as a way of drawing out and understanding men’s connectional proclivities. The recent historical, political, economical, and cultural context of Korea is also used for a more comprehensive analysis of Korean men’s relaitonality. The Trinitarian existence of God in perichoresis and God’s desire to include us to the divine communal reality provide much meaning into Korean men’s uiri(의리) and checkimgam (responsibility/책임감). Lastly, some spiritual, familial, and social implications of Korean men’s relationality are presented.
This article explores the anatomy of the two critical manifestations of Korean men’s relationality: uiri (의리) and checkimgam (responsibility/책임감). Women’s strong yet neglected relational voices are presented as a way of drawing out and understanding men’s connectional proclivities. The recent historical, political, economical, and cultural context of Korea is also used for a more comprehensive analysis of Korean men’s relaitonality. The Trinitarian existence of God in perichoresis and God’s desire to include us to the divine communal reality provide much meaning into Korean men’s uiri(의리) and checkimgam (responsibility/책임감). Lastly, some spiritual, familial, and social implications of Korean men’s relationality are presented.
I. Introduction II. Gender Differences in Relationality III. Korean Men’s Relationality: The Hidden Psyche IV. Implications for Pastoral Theology and Care V. Conclusion References
