16세기 동양과 서양의 공동체 이념에 대한 비교 연구

Abstract

This paper’s attempt to analyze the concept of community that emerged from the political upheavals of the 16th century aims to look at the desire and imagination of the people for a new system in the changes that occurred from the previous era’s systemandideology. In other words, the political discussions in the 16th century about new ideologies as the Middle Age society and ideologies were collapsing she dlight on the new community’s ideological focus beyond the old Middle Age communities. Also, the new city-community and village-community concepts that were suggested during the 16th century both in the West and in the East include criticism of previous political beliefs. These new concepts emerged before modern political ideology and the nation-state system were formed. What was the concept of community in the 16th century, when the old was doubted and the new ideal community was presented? This study compares and analyzes the 16th century’s concept of “commune,” namely the radical religious reformation, Anabaptism’s “Christianself-governing community,” and the Joseon’s village-community, represented by hyangyak’s “Confucianself-governing community.”When the characteristics of each movement are examined, the greatest difference appears to be that one succeeded and one failed. The Anabaptist movement suffered persecution and many of their leaders were executed, but they eventually escaped to a new continent; the Sarim eventually took over power from the Hungu sectin Korea. Ironically, because the Anabaptist movement failed in Europe, their community could persist, while the hyangyak community lost its original characteristics by succeeding. Another noticeable difference is the perceptions of the relationship between the religious world and the secular work. The self-governing communities of the Anabaptist movement attempted to achieve the true Christian life and order through the recovery of the primitive Christian mindset. The movement criticized not only the contemporary secular order, but also the contemporary Christian order and ideology. In the case of the Anabaptists, they criticized the perspective of admitting the independence of two different worlds by segregating the religious order and the secular order, such as the Lutheran’s two-kingdom concept, even within the same religious reformation movement. They either tried to synchronize the secular order with God’s will or tried to separate the two worlds to keep their religious purity by escaping from the secular world. Therefore, to them, the secular world was an object either to deny or criticize. On the other hand, the hyangyak tried to synchronize the secular order with the Confucian order, but it focused more on ethical behavior in the secular life to create a Confucian community. As a result, hyangyak criticized the existing Hungu sect’s corruption and political behavior, but was the Hungu sect all that different from the shared beliefs and the reinterpretation of Sung Confucianism? As a result, the hyangyak movement only could be come a criticism of the secular power of the Hungu sect, not a fundamental criticism of the previous Confucian or der and ideology. In other words, in the Confucian community, the Confucian or der was not a religion, but rather an ethical application; hence, it did not seek the universality of an ideal community, but rather the individual application of ethical norms carried out in real life. Then, may be there as on that these self-governing communities from two different parts of the world were either more radical in real life or more adaptable was not only because of the differences of the leading class, whether peasants or upper class, but also because of ideological differences.