Political Faction, Social Memory, and Spirituality: A Phenomenological Study of the Yeosu–Suncheon Incident (19 October 1948) and Korean Christian Spirituality

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article deals with an important theme from the point of view of Korea and also world peace, and the future or Christianity. As described, the political and socio-cultural situation in the South has essentially paved the way for the growth of Christianity, and its influence in the country. Coined with the anti-communist stance, including a one-sided remembrance of history, the situation is also ambivalent. The downside is that one-sidedness is a burden for the healing of memories, the current development of Christianity and for the peace and reconciliation process. 

The analytical use of the social memory theory and critical historical research are indeed useful in aiming towards finding ways towards healing, inclusion and a balanced, truthful way to understand the historical and current identity of the Korean society and people. Critical reflection and truthfulness are essential if the aim is, at some point in the future, to find a way towards a sustainable peace and reconciliation from the point of view of the peninsula. 

The article as such is already an interesting and forward-looking contribution to research. However, it raises the question if it would be useful to refer to other cases of civil war with more or less parallel situations, and what kind of research has been done elsewhere regarding the reconciliation processes, seeing beyond propagandistic ways to remember, understand and sanctify things? Another question is if there are some concrete ideas how to develop projects in the South of Korea which would aim towards healing of memories, towards accuracy in historical remembrance? Moreover, what kind of theological ideas there are to develop the Korean theological thought beyond a simplified victim-perpetrator dynamic? 

Author Response

I am very grateful for your comments and review. Your opinion is truly helpful for making a stronger argumentation and make my paper better. Please see the attachment for the application of your comments. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This article  provides a compelling historical and theological analysis of polarisation within Korean Christianity. By examining the Yeosu-Suncheon 10.19 Incident (1948), it clearly demonstrates how political conflict and collective memory have shaped Korean Christian spirituality. The use of historical, ecclesial and theological sources is appropriate and well balanced. The following comments suggest minor revisions.

Comment 1

2. Research Method, lines 78-122

The methodological discussion invokes Jan Assmann’s theory of cultural memory, yet the engagement remains largely programmatic rather than analytical. Assmann’s framework is cited, but not sufficiently theorised as a guiding methodology that structures the analysis. As a result, the relationship between theory and empirical material occasionally appears implicit rather than methodologically controlled.

To strengthen the article, the author should more carefully delineate how mnemohistory differs from historical reconstruction, and how its focus on meaning-making, identity formation and normative orientation informs the theological interpretation of the 10.19 Incident. Without such clarification, the methodological foundation risks appearing under-theorised relative to the sophistication of the empirical analysis.

Comment 2

6. Continuing Political Conflict and Korean Christian Spirituality, lines 698-709

The article offers a careful and compelling analysis of the Yeosu-Suncheon Incident (October 19, 1948) and its long-term impact on Korean Christian spirituality. However, the transition in Section 6, from the historical analysis of 1948 directly to contemporary events in 2024, appears somewhat abrupt and would benefit from further contextual mediation.

While it is historically accurate that anti-communist logic has exerted a lasting influence on Korean Christianity, not all sectors of the Korean Church have been shaped by this framework in the same way. To avoid overgeneralisation and to strengthen analytical continuity, the author may wish to acknowledge more explicitly the existence of ecumenical and prophetic strands within Korean Christianity that have sought to overcome Cold War binaries through practices of reconciliation, peace-building and critical engagement with state power.

Situating these alternative traditions as a mediating layer between 1948 and 2024 would allow the discussion of contemporary ultra-conservative Protestant movements under the Yoon Suk Yeol administration to appear not as a sudden leap, but as the intensification of one historically dominant trajectory within a more diverse ecclesial landscape.

Comment  3

“Finally, Korean Christianity must re-center the teachings of Jesus in its spirituality ..." lines 830-841

The article provides a persuasive analysis of how Korean Christianity has been shaped by Cold War binaries and anti-communist moral frameworks and the call to re-center spirituality on the teachings of Jesus is a valuable and timely contribution. That said, this concluding proposal is presented rather briefly and may be read primarily in ethical terms. A modest expansion clarifying how Jesus-centered spirituality functions as a theological and spiritual framework, rather than solely as moral exhortation, would further strengthen the coherence between the article’s analytical sections and its normative conclusions. Such clarification would enhance the overall depth of the argument without requiring substantial structural revision.

Recommendation: accept this article with minor revisions

This article offers a well-argued and timely analysis of the historical and theological roots of polarisation within Korean Christianity, supported by appropriate use of sources and careful interpretation. The suggested revisions are minor and primarily involve clarifying the methodological framework and modestly strengthening the theological articulation of Jesus-centered spirituality. With these adjustments, this article will make a valuable contribution to the journal.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your time and comments. Your questions and suggestions are truly helpful to make my paper improved. For detail applications of your comments in my paper, please see the attacement. Thank you again.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx