Nationalism and Religion

It is no surprise that there are often antithetical assertions about their relationship. For example, some say that nationalism is intrinsically secular, while others believe that it is intrinsically religious. Still, others state that nationalism had emerged from the decline of

religion, whilst others believe instead that it had emerged in a period of intensified an analogous phenomenon.²³

Rogers Brubaker was an American sociologist who introduced highly selective study cases to study the relationship between religion and nationalism. He recently published his findings in Religion and Nationalism: Four Approaches (2012). Rogers Brubaker’s article studies the four logical categorizations of relations between religion and nationalism as follows: (1)

22 Rhee, Japan inside out, 70

23 Rogers, Religion and Nationalism, 1

10

Religion and nationalism as analogous phenomena (2) Religion as a cause or explanation of nationalism (3) Religion as imbricated or intertwined with nationalism (4) Religious nationalism as a distinctive kind of nationalism.

This article is a compilation of literature to study the relationship between nationalism and religion. However, the author missed the case of Republic of Korea, which should have been studied earlier as it was the very first nation to be built upon Christian values. In the first section:

Religion and nationalism as analogous phenomena, Brubaker says that characterizations of nationalism as a religion are such analogous phenomena. He adds that “Rather than characterize nationalism with terms drawn from the field of religion, as Hayes and to a certain extent Smith do - faith, reverence, liturgy, cult, God, salvation, scripture, sacred objects, and holy days - it may be useful to connect both phenomenon to more general social structures and processes.”

(Brubaker 2012:3) He identifies that both religion and nationalism systems are formed within a given community and shares the same interests of political, economic or cultural values. The second section was Religion as a cause or explanation of nationalism, where the author tries to explain why religion is a cause of nationalism using Benedict Anderson’s reflection. According to Anderson, the cultural root of nationalism was an explanation to ‘print-capitalism’. This was when the publishers of religious tracts and other materials sought wider markets and assembled varied idiolects into smaller numbers of increasingly standardized ‘print languages’, which was later secularly and widely used in politics and nationalism.

Brubaker looks at how religion and nationalism are intertwined in the third approach:

11

Religion as imbricated or intertwined with nationalism. Firstly, Jewish nationalism and Sikh nationalism prove that in some circumstances, a particular religion can be the primary boundary of national identification. The second way in which they are intertwined is that religion does not necessarily define the boundaries of the nation, but it supplies myths, metaphors, and symbols that are central to the discursive or iconic representation of the nation. In the fourth approach:

Religious nationalism as a distinctive kind of nationalism; he did not discuss only the parallels between nationalism and religion. Rather, Brubaker supported Friedland's argument by saying that “religion is a totalizing order capable of regulating every aspect of life,” although Friedland acknowledged that this was less true of Christianity, given its origins as a stateless faith.

In the second approach from Rogers Brubaker’s Religion and Nationalism, Religion as a cause or explanation of nationalism, he explains one of the factors that affect the origins and development of nationalism. He suggests that the influence of the Protestant Reformation on nationalism was (1) constructing ‘social and political relationships’ (2) promoting and fostering literacy and (3) ‘bringing polity and culture’ into nationalism, more specifically, in politics. He says Christianity does not encompass a unified language like Islam does, but it has an important core value called Confessionalization. He adds that “Confessionalization substantially tightened the relation between political organizations, religious belief and practice. This provided a model the congruence between culture and policy to happen that is at the core of nationalism.”

(Brubaker 2012:9) This argument is valid in the case of Korea. In contrast to Anderson's ‘print-capitalism,’ Rhee used such mass literacy for religious purposes to strengthen nationalism and bringing polity and culture into his new Korean government.

12

At the decline of Shamanism and the Joseon Empire, nationalism began to increase in Korean peninsula. The rise of nationalism in Korea was a movement of national spiritual

mobilization. It was an administrative, political, and fiscal reformation of the nation. Joseon was a small, weak state, which had lost its sovereign independence in the stormy waters of

international politics. But at the forefront of this dynamic reformation of modern Korean politics, economy, and history, there was Syngman Rhee (이승만; April 18, 1875 - July 19, 1965). Rhee was a passionate nationalist who wished to awaken his fellow compatriots to accept and support modernization and nation-building based on Western models.²⁴ He selected America and its predominant religion of Christianity as the role model of the R.O.K.²⁵

After years of studying the Bible, he realized that the honest and faithful characteristics of Americans stemmed from their Christian faith. Compared to American people, the people of Joseon were significantly less motivated and lazy.²⁶ Thus, he created the Christian nation-building theory, which emphasized the need for Joseon being reborn as a Christian country.

In the fourth approach: Religious nationalism as a distinctive kind of nationalism;

Brubaker studies Friedland's acknowledgment that ‘stateless faith is the origins of Christianity.’

This approach is not necessarily true for Korea. Rhee accepted Christian faith in order to make Korea a powerful state. This helped Korea achieve independence from Japanese Imperialism and the Korean Unification during his presidency, which completely contrasted to Friedland's idea.

24 Rhee and Kim, The Spirit of Independence, 274-5

25 Rhee, Hanguk gyohoe pipbak, 173-81

26 Ibid., 141-43

13

Rhee’s vision of an ideal Korea was characterized by (1) market economy (2) Mutual Defense Treaty Between the R.O.K. and the U.S. (3) liberal democracy and (4) Christianity.²⁷ As a footnote, he accepted anti-communism since communism was the opposite extreme of Christianity, and market economy, which was the closest to Christian ideology.

27 Rhee and Kim, The Spirit of Independence, 240-44

14