지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This paper deals with the relationship between religion and welfare by analyzing two models of Edward R. Canda and David S. Derezotes. These models were proposed in order to practice religious welfare effectively in the context of multi-religious and multi-spiritual modern society, especially American society. World religions teach their believers to follow ethical values and to have social responsibility of changing better world. Korean scholars have paid attention to historical and sociological dimension of religious welfare, but I will focus on the more practical dimension which previous works seem to have overlooked.
First, Korean scholars criticize the misusage of public fund for proselytism (forced conversion) in the name of welfare. They also point out the problems of vague definition and social justice. Concerning these problems, American scholars already examined theoretical issues of religious welfare. Second, there are two opposite positions to religious welfare. Supporters claim the necessity of religious welfare to complement public system and meet different needs of clients. Objectors deny the importance of religious welfare pointing out its non-scientific nature. But most social workers recognize the usefulness in their services. Third, Canda`s model embrace religious and spiritual worldviews including non-religious ones. Canda finds the common ground of love in world religions, but doesn`t force clients to accept what he believes. Derezotes` model pays attention to the spiritual healing of religious welfare, therefore the role of social worker is similar to that of healer and religious leader. In spite of the differences, these models claims the sensibility of religious welfare to offer services to clients with various backgrounds.
In conclusion, we need the balance between generalist and specialist in the practice of religious welfare. In order to improve the welfare service, the religious dimension should be re-evaluated in terms of multi-religion and multi-spirituality.
First, Korean scholars criticize the misusage of public fund for proselytism (forced conversion) in the name of welfare. They also point out the problems of vague definition and social justice. Concerning these problems, American scholars already examined theoretical issues of religious welfare. Second, there are two opposite positions to religious welfare. Supporters claim the necessity of religious welfare to complement public system and meet different needs of clients. Objectors deny the importance of religious welfare pointing out its non-scientific nature. But most social workers recognize the usefulness in their services. Third, Canda`s model embrace religious and spiritual worldviews including non-religious ones. Canda finds the common ground of love in world religions, but doesn`t force clients to accept what he believes. Derezotes` model pays attention to the spiritual healing of religious welfare, therefore the role of social worker is similar to that of healer and religious leader. In spite of the differences, these models claims the sensibility of religious welfare to offer services to clients with various backgrounds.
In conclusion, we need the balance between generalist and specialist in the practice of religious welfare. In order to improve the welfare service, the religious dimension should be re-evaluated in terms of multi-religion and multi-spirituality.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론 : 종교현상으로서 복지
Ⅱ. 종교학계의 주요 선행연구: 무엇이 문제인가?
Ⅲ. 종교복지에 대한 찬반논쟁 : 미국의 맥락
Ⅳ. 캔다의 모델 : 다종교복지실천론
Ⅴ. 데레조테의 모델 : 창조적 영성치유론
Ⅵ. 결론 : 종교복지에 대한 종교학적 평가
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (3)
참고문헌 신청
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2015-200-001214616