Part Two: Han and the Holy Spirit

In the last post, I set the background for Dr. Andrew Park’s understanding of han. He defined han as “the wound of victims that festers in their hearts.” This wound leads to a black hole of collapsed pain within sufferers. Not only does their Spirit become broken, but wounds caused by trauma lead to measurable changes in the brain. This wound manifests outwardly in many ways, including an inability to deal with stress, quick reactivity, self-blame, and numbness. In order to heal the brokenness in the lives of individuals, the debilitating wound must be allowed to surface.

In Park’s understanding, han is both personal and collective, and its effects manifest both actively and passively, consciously and subconsciously. On the collective, active, subconscious level, Park argues that han can express itself as racial resentment. [NOTE: Members of our own MTSO community have recently signed the Boston Declaration. The Declaration decries, in part, “current trends in Evangelicalism and other expressions of Christianity driven by white supremacy, often enacted through white privilege and the normalizing of oppression.” It then confesses racism as the United States’ original sin. In light of Park’s insights, some questions arise. Could we add the dimension of collective han to our understanding of how racism has manifested in Christianity in the United States? How could this understanding inform ecumenical dialogue? Can addressing the han of racism more holistically, as both a social and spiritual issue, lead to new avenues of healing and unity in the Church?]

Park went on to describe how those who have been oppressed define sin, and how han may be a more helpful designation. For example, Valerie Saiving noted that pride, rooted in self-centeredness, is the sin of men, not women. For her, other issues, such as the lack of an organizing center, are women’s sins. For Gustavo Gutiérrez, sin has a threefold nature, consisting of economic and sociopolitical oppression, historic fatalism, and spiritual sin. Park argues that Saiving’s named sins, and the first two aspects of sin that Gutiérrez lists, are the results of being sinned against. As such, they could be considered han. He noted that each of us is likely to contain both sin and han, and that one can result in the other. When han explodes negatively, destruction of others and communities can result. [NOTE: Could this apply to the current explosion of racism in some sectors of the Church?] But if resolved positively, victims of han can be healed personally, and rebuild their communities.

He then provided an extensive list of examples of han in the Hebrew Bible and New Testament (for example, many of the “sinners” in the New Testament were really alienated victims). Park sees two purposes of the Incarnation: Jesus’ salvation of sinners through their repentance, and his releasing the victims of sin from their wounds through healing. In his view, the Church must recover Jesus’ holistic mission.

In order to obey Jesus’ commission to us, Park says we must first wait upon the Holy Spirit, who is the future of the Church. The Spirit is capable of healing and renewing broken communities in ways we alone cannot. Within a Pentecostal context, receiving the Holy Spirit must never be limited to personal gain, but must always manifest itself in the collective healing of spirits, communities, and the whole creation. [NOTE: I believe this insight can inform a more holistic praxis for the entire body of Christ.]

Next up, I will cover the day’s afternoon session.