풍류신학, 우리의 얼을 통해 성서에 증거된 복음 이해 : 기독일보 2009

풍류신학, 우리의 얼을 통해 성서에 증거된 복음 이해 : 기독교 : 미주 종교신문1위 : 기독일보


기독교
한인교회
입력 Sep 23, 2009

 
풍류신학, 우리의 얼을 통해 성서에 증거된 복음 이해
한국 토착화 신학의 대가 유동식 박사 강연
기독일보 김준형 기자

유동식 교수가 한국기독교연구소의 초청으로 시카고 지역의 신학교에서 3차례 강연을 한다. 지난 22일 게렛신학교에서 강의하는 유 교수.

“미륵반가사유상에서 예수 그리스도의 모습을, 태극 문양에서 기독교의 부활신앙을 찾는다.”

87세의 노학자는 “저는 그렇게 생각하게 됐습니다”, “이렇게 보면 어떨까요”라는 겸손한 표현으로 시카고 지역의 청년 후학들에게 신학적 화두를 계속 던졌다. 1960년대 한국 토착화 신학을 주도한 논쟁의 주인공이자 풍류신학, 예술신학 등 신조어를 탄생시킨 장본인 소금(素琴) 유동식 교수가 한국기독교연구소(Center for Study of Korean Christianity)의 창립 2주년을 기념하는 강연회 “그리스도와 한국문화”에서 3차례에 걸쳐 강의한다.

9월 22일 오후 5시 게렛신학교에서는 “복음과 풍류도-복음적 실존과 한인의 영성”이라는 주제로 강의가 이뤄졌고 이번 기념강연회를 준비한 한국기독교연구소와 게렛신학교, 맥코믹신학교, 시카고신학교의 학생들, 시카고 지역 목회자들이 노학자의 강의에 귀를 기울였다. 이 강의에는 게렛신학교의 타민족 교수들도 관심을 갖고 참석했다.

유 교수는 자신이 토착화 신학을 시작한 이유부터 밝혔다. 그는 일제 치하에서 청소년, 청년기를 보내며 일제의 한국문화 말살정책으로 인해 한국문화에 관해 거의 배우지 못했다. 그런 상태에서 신학부터 접하게 됐다. 나중에 한국인으로서의 정체성을 찾고자 했을 때 그가 접한 한국 문화 유산들은 자연히 한국적 전통보다는 신학적 관점에서 해석될 수 밖에 없었다. 그는 “내가 토착화 신학의 연구물을 내어 놓았을 때 신학계에서도 비판이 거셌지만 민속학자들 역시 ‘본질보다는 기독교 신학적 해석의 연장’이라고 비판해 왔다”고 회고했다. 그는 “현재 우리가 배우고 연구하는 대부분의 신학은 서구의 라틴 문화, 그리스 문화 속에서 해석되어 온 신학이다. 지금부터 내가 하는 강의는 아시아적 영성에 관해서, 한국적 영성에 관해서다”라고 말했다.

먼저 유 교수는 칠판에 하늘을 상징하는 원을 그린 후, 그 안에 땅을 상징하는 사각형을 그렸다. 그 사각형을 가로지르는 줄을 X 형태로 그어 삼각형 4개를 만들었다. 그는 삼각형에 대해 “사람은 이렇게 땅에 서서 하늘을 바라보며 사는 존재”라고 정의했다. 그는 천지인(天地人)의 개념에서 ‘삼태극’이란 한민족 고유의 문양의 도출해 냈으며 이 삼태극이 한민족의 심성 안에 흐르는 가장 기본적 ‘영성’이라고 강조했다.

그는 하나님이 이 세상을 창조한 이유를 “아름다움”이라고 정리했다. 창조할 때마다, 창조를 다 마치신 후 “보시기에 좋았다”는 표현은 멋있었다, 아름다웠다는 뜻이며 하나님의 창조 목적도 이 아름다움이었다. 유 교수에게 이 아름다움은 한국적으로는 “멋”이라는 용어로 각인됐다. 하나님의 형상으로 창조된 인간의 사명은 하나님이 주신 이 세상의 아름다움을 다스리는 것이다.

유 교수는 한민족의 멋이 가장 압축된 예술작품으로 금동 미륵반가사유상을 꼽았다. 현재 대한민국 국보 78호에 지정된 미륵상은 신라 화랑을 모델로 만들어졌다고 한다. 미륵은 불교의 가르침 속에 있는 세상을 구원할 메시아다. 화랑은 당시 세상에서 가장 이상적인 청년상이었고 미륵과 동일시 됐기에 미륵반가사유상 역시 화랑을 모델로 하고 있는 것이다. 유 교수는 신라의 화랑들이 풍류도를 즐기며 수련했다는 삼국사기의 최치원 난랑비문으로부터 풍류는 자연을 즐기는 멋을 상징하며 자연 안에 깃든 천령(天靈)과 교제하고 신인합일(神人合一)을 추구하는 것이었다고 본다. 이 대목에서 그의 그 유명한 ‘풍류신학’이 태동된다고 볼 수 있다.

그는 또 “한민족 불교의 큰 영향을 받은 일본에도 금동 미륵상과 동일한 목조 미륵반가사유상이 있는데 이것을 본 독일 철학자 야스퍼스는 ‘인간 실존의 최고 이념의 표현’이라 극찬했다”면서 “이 아름다움의 극치는 무엇인가? 바로 구원”이라고 단언했다. 약컨데, 그는 미륵상에서 구원의 아름다움을 찾고, 미륵과 동일시 된 화랑이 추구하던 멋을 하나님이 창조시에 지은 멋과 연결시킨다. 그는 미륵상 외에도 다양한 한국문화 예술품에서 기독교를 발견하려고 노력하고 있으며 이것에서 “예술신학”이란 개념이 탄생했다.

멋을 강조하는 풍류도는 기독교 부활신앙과도 맞닿아 있다. 그는 “그날에는 내가 아버지 안에, 너희가 내 안에, 내가 너희 안에 있는 것을 너희가 알리라(요14:20)”라는 구절에서 부활의 모습을 찾는다. 하나님과 인간이 그리스도를 매개로 하나되는 것이 부활의 모습이며 이것 역시 신과 인간이 하나되는 풍류도의 신인합일사상과 맥을 같이 한다.

그는 “한국의 하나님을 찾는 것은 한국의 아름다움을 찾는 것”이라면서 “한국의 미술사를 살펴 보면 하나님의 빛이 우리 문화에도 비춰지고 있음을 확인하게 된다”고 강조했다. 이어 “우리의 얼을 통해 성서에 증거된 복음을 이해하자는 노력을 풍류신학이라 부른다”며 강의를 마쳤다.

다음 강의는 24일 오후 5시 시카고신학교(George Commons)에서 열리는 “동방의 등불-한국 문화의 역사적 사명”, 28일 오후 5시 맥코믹신학교(Common Room)에서 열리는 “장미와 연꽃, 그리고 무궁화-오늘을 사는 영원한 생명의 아름다움” 등이 있다. 3번의 학술강연 후 29일에는 시카고한인제일연합감리교회에서 유 교수의 신학전집 출판기념회가 예정돼 있다.

1922년생인 유 교수는 연세대의 전신인 연희전문학교에서 수학하고 감리교신학대를 졸업한 후, 배화여고 등에서 교직에 몸담았다 미연합감리교회의 장학금을 받아 보스턴대학교로 유학했다. 이후 스위스 에큐메니칼 연구원, 일본 도쿄대 등에서 공부했으며 일본 국학원대학교에서 문학박사 학위를 받았다. 귀국 후 감리교신학대 교수, 연세대 신과대 교수 등을 역임하다 은퇴했다.

100살 신학자 유동식 “우리의 혼 풍류도를 발현해 세계인을 열광케 하라”

100살 신학자 유동식 “우리의 혼 풍류도를 발현해 세계인을 열광케 하라”


100살 신학자 유동식 “우리의 혼 풍류도를 발현해 세계인을 열광케 하라”

2021. 1. 20. 10:43ㆍ성인들 가르침/일반좋은글


‘코로나19 사태’로 많은 이가 고통받고 있다. 미래가 잘 보이지 않는 젊은이들에게 코로나는 엎친 데 덮친 충격이다. 이 충격은 일시적 재앙에 그치지 않을 수 있다. 코로나가 근본적인 변화의 출발점이 될 수도 있다. 이 전환의 시기, 우리는 어떻게 살며 어떻게 미래를 준비해야 할까. 선각자의 혜안을 얻기 위해 휴심정이 플라톤아카데미와 공동으로 ‘인생 멘토에게 코로나 이후의 길을 묻다’ 시리즈를 진행한다. 4주 간격으로 10회에 걸쳐 연재하는 시리즈의 다섯번째 멘토는 풍류신학의 창시자 유동식(99) 교수다.







유동식 교수. 사진 조현 기자



유동식 교수는 황해도 평산 남천에서 태어나 연희전문대를 거쳐 일본 도쿄 동부신학교에 유학 중 1944년 일제 학도병으로 징집됐다가 한국전쟁 직후 감신대를 거쳐 미국 보스턴대학원에서 공부했다. 이어 감신대와 연세대 교수를 지냈다.그는 한국 나이로 100살이다. 일제강점기 연희전문에서 윤동주 시인과 함께 기숙사 생활을 했다. 그는 서울 서대문구 대신동 연세대 옆 단독주택에서 홀로 산다. 부인 윤정은 전 이화여대 교수가 4년간의 암 투병 끝에 2004년 별세했으니, 사실상 20년 넘게 홀로 삼시 세끼를 해결하며 산 셈이다. 그런데도 초인종을 누르자 2층에서 내려와 마당을 가로질러 대문을 손수 열어줬다. 초인종이 울릴 때마다 운동 삼아 직접 나온다고 한다. ‘원활한 대화와 인터뷰가 가능할까’라는 염려를 일거에 날리고, 무려 3시간 동안 질문에 자세히 답했다.그는 “코로나19 사태가 기독교인에게는 교회라는 공간을 넘어 참 신앙을 찾는 계기가 될 수 있다”고 했다. 또한 한국 전통의 얼을 풍류도로 보고 풍류신학을 연 그는 케이팝의 원류를 풍류도라고 본다. 그는 “춤과 노래와 예술혼인 풍류도를 마음껏 발현하라”고 젊은 세대를 격려했다. 그는 일제강점기 우리의 자존심을 살려줬던 타고르의 시 ‘동방의 등불’을 영어로 줄줄 외웠다. 그러면서 ‘동방의 등불’은 풍류도를 오늘에 알린 최치원이 썼던 말이라고 했다. 다음은 유동식 교수와 주고받은 일문일답이다.-왜 풍류도에 천착하게 됐나.

“일제시대 이루 말할 수 없는 열등의식 속에서 살다가 해방이 됐는데, 한국전쟁 이후 미국 유학을 가보니까, 나는 4대째 기독교 모태신앙인데도 내 사고방식이나 가치관이 그들과는 달랐다. 그러다가 일본의 석학인 야나기 무네요시가 쓴 <한국과 예술>이란 책을 봤다. 명치유신때 영국에 유학했다가 육로로 돌아오면서 문화 예술을 직접 눈으로 확인하면서 수년에 걸쳐 일본에 돌아갔던 그는 석굴암 본존불을 보고 감탄해 무려 7번을 올라갔다. 그러면서 일본이 문화적으로는 절대 한국을 지배할 수 없다고 했다. 일제시대인데 말이다. 그래서 아 우리 전통을 찾다가 <삼국사기>에 나온 최치원의 난랑비문에서 풍류도를 보고, ‘아, 이게 우리민족의 얼’이구나 생각했다.”







유동식 교수가 우리 전통의 얼과 통하는 풍류신학을 형상화해 그린 그림. 사진 조현 기자



-풍류도를 왜 우리 민족의 얼로 보는가.“고운 최치원이 12세 때 당나라 유학을 떠나 과거까지 급제하고 17년만에 고국에 돌아왔다. 너무 어려서 가서 신라에 대해선 몰랐다. 그런데 당나라에서 유불도를 다 익히고 와보니 신라에 그것이 다 있더라는 것이었다. 그래서 ‘우리나라에는 깊고 오묘한 도가 있다. 이를 풍류라 한다. 실로 이는 유·불·도 삼교를 포함한 것이요, 모든 중생과 접해 인간화 한다”고 했다. 중국에도 풍류라는 말은 있지만 그것이 도가 된 건 한국뿐이다. 풍류는 멋이다. 그건 서양의 미의식과는 다르다. 한국인은 특유의 미의식이 있어서 인생을 멋있게 살라고 한다. 유불도를 다 통달해야 나오는 멋이다. 그게 한국인의 얼이다.”-풍류도와 기독교가 어떻게 연결될 수 있나.“우리나라의 종교를 살펴보니, 불교 천년, 유교 5백년. 다 중국에서 왔다. 그 뿌리를 캐다보니 무교가 있었다. 나는 무속이라고 하지않고 무교라고 한다. 삼국지 위지 동이전에도 보면 만주지역에 살던 우리 조상들이 봄, 가을에 여러날 춤을 추고 노래를 부르며 하늘에 제사를 지내는 게 나온다. 그들의 노래가 무교인(무당)을 통해 전해온게 700여가지나 된다. 난 박사학위를 그 무교로 했다. 무당박사다. 그래서 이단으로 많이 몰렸다. 그런데 이제 풍류신학을 모르는 사람이 없다. 그 때는 그걸 알아야 우리의 얼을 찾겠더라. 불교, 유교도 풍류도를 통해 재해석돼 한국불교, 한국유교가 된것이다. 기독교도 풍류도로 해석되어야 한국인의 마음에 더 깊게 와닿게 된다. 사람 의식은 일이백년에 쉽게 바뀌는게 아니기 때문이다.”-풍류도를 언급한 신라의 유학자 최치원이 사용한 ‘동방의 등불’이란 말을 어떻게 타고르가 사용했을까.“1922년 3.1운동 여파로 한국인들이 침울하던 때, 당시 동경에는 한인 유학생 400명이 있었다. 이 때 인도의 시성 타고르가 일본을 방문했다. 인도도 영국의 식민지여서 한국의 3.1운동에 강한 인상을 받고 있었다고 한다. 또 헐버트가 1905년에 낸 <한국역사>라는 영어 책과 야나기 무네요시의 논문 등을 통해 타고르도 한국 문화와 예술에 대해 알고 있었다고 한다. 도쿄와이엠시에이에 조선인유학생사무실이 있었는데, 그곳에 타고르를 초대했더니 타고르가 와주고 가면서 그 ‘등방의 등불’이란 시를 적어 건네 줬다고 한다. (영어로 시 전문을 외운 뒤). 일제시대 일본은 일등국민이라고 하고, 우릴 멸시해서 얼마나 심한 열등의식 속에서 살았는지 모른다. 그 땐 영어도 잘 못했지만, 그 열등감에서 벗어나게 하는 동방의 등불만은 다 외웠다. 우리나라가 중국에 의해 속국이 되어도 직접 지배를 받는 식민이 되어 우리 말도 마음대로 못쓰고, 성씨도 못쓰게 한 건 일제시대밖에 없다. 지금 아무리 시대가 힘드니, 나쁘니 해도, 그 멸시를 당한 왜정시대와는 비교할 수 없다. 그 때는 도저히 당당할 수가 없었다. 어떤 세상도 왜정시대보다는 낫다.”-한국 풍류도와 일본 무사도의 비교했는데요. 어떻게 다른가?“교토 동지사대학 창립자 니즈마 주기 때마다.외국석학들을 불러 특강을 시키는데, 100주기 때 특강 강사로 나를 초청했다. 그 때 무사도와 풍류도를 주제로 3일간 강의를 했다. 일본인들의 상징은 칼과 거울이다. 그들은 맞으면 맞고 아니면 아니다. 그들은 생선도 날것 그대로 사시미로 먹는다.. 자연 그대로를 음미한다. 그러나 우린 그게 아니다. 우린 있는 걸 몽땅 넣어 비벼먹는다. 복장도 일인들은 바지를 안입고 남녀가 다 치마를 입었다. 해양족들이 그렇다. 그런데 우리같은 기마민족들은 바지에 댓잎을 묶는다. 우리처럼 소고기를 많이 먹는 민족도 없다. 말 타던 북방민족의 특성이다. 야생 사냥을 하던 이들이어서 우리만 쇠젖가락을 쓴다. 이웃 민족들은 다 나무젖가락을 쓰는데도 말이다. 옛날엔 담배 쌈지에 칼을 꼿고 다녔다. 사냥하던 전통이 있어서 그랬다. 일본 도쿄대학 교수가 한때 일본인도 기마민족이라고 주장했는데, 일본에서 그 설을 막았다. 왜냐면 기마민족설에 따르면 한국민이 월등한게 드러나고 일본인이 열등민족이 되고 말기 때문이다. 기마민족의 원시 종교가 바로 무교다. 기마민족은 동서남북 땅이 아니라 하늘의 별을 보고 다니니, 하느님을 찾고, 하느님을 믿는다. 그게 유일신자에겐 하나님이다. 일본사람들은 하느님이란 말이 없다. 천황을 신으로 믿으니까. 유대민족도 유목민의 후손이다. 아시아에서 일본은 거의 없는데 우리나라가 기독교 인구가 가장 많은 것은 원시 종교인 하느님 신앙과 연결이 되기 때문이다.”-싸이와 방탄소년단, 불랙핑크, 이날치밴드에 세계인들이 열광하는 것을 어떻게 보는가.“몇년 전 홍콩의 대학에서 강의해달라고 했을 때 알렉산더는 말을 타고 파키스탄까지 밖에 못왔지만 싸이는 말춤으로 세계를 정복했다고 했다. 한민족은 아세아의 독특한 민족이다. 중국이 주변국을 다 먹었다. 위구르족은 종교도 이슬람이고 민족도 전혀 다른데 그곳까지 다 합쳤다. 그런데 조그만 한국은 못합친다. 합쳐지지가 않는다. 그들과는 다른 우리의 독자성이 있기 때문이다. 춤추고 노래하는 풍류도에 세계가 열광하는 것을 보라. 이제 왜정시대 살았던 우리처럼 세상 어디에서도 기 죽을 게 없다. 우리 얼인 풍류의 춤과 노래와 예술로 마음껏 뽐내보라. 그것이 우리 민족의 최고 장점이다.”-한국에서 기독교가 동양에서 가장 크게 꽃피운 것은 고대에 하늘신앙이 있었기 때문이라고 했는데, 고대의 무교와 기독교는 어떻게 연결되나.“무속은 3가지를 빈다. 첫째는 건강하고 오래 살게 해달라고 제적거리를 하고, 이어 부자 되게 해달라고 대감거리를 하고, 평화롭게 해달라고 성주거리를 한다. 그것이 열두거리의 핵심이다. 오늘날 교회도 오래 살고 부자 되고 편하게 살게 해달라고 빈다. 그러나 그런것만을 목적으로 하면 무속과 다를게 없다. 그런 것을 넘어서 그걸 극복하고 다른 차원의 인생의 의미를 찾는게 종교다. 창조주 하나님의 섭리에 의해 너와 내가 이 세상에 태어났으니 서로 사랑하고 살자는게 기독교다.”-근본주의 기독교인들은 전통 종교와 문화를 미신시하는데, 이를 어떻게 보나“하나님은 한 문화, 한 언어로만 말씀하시지 않는다. 불교를 통해서도 말씀하시고, 유교를 통해서도 말씀하시다가 그리스도를 통해 말씀하셨다. 나는 부처님도 공자님도 하나님께서 보낸 예언자라고 생각한다. 구약의 이사야만 예언자가 아니고. 그런 분들이 계셔서 우리나라를 더 풍요롭게 했다.”-기독교가 한국에 끼친 영향은“뭐니뭐니해도 문화적인 현대화다. 선교사들이 들어오자마자 배제, 이화, 배화 등 학교를 세웠기에 한국이 근대화의 첫걸음을 걸었다. 그들이 전도하는 것을 목적으로 삼지않고 교육과 자선사업을 하고 나중에 홀트가 와서는 고아들까지 돌보았다. 우리의 바탕에 깔린 어려움을 해소해준게 기독교인들이다. 한국 근대화화는 기독교와 뗄래야 뗄수가 없다.”-신학적으로 영향 받은 인물은

“내 신학의 조상은 불투만이다. 불투만. 그의 ‘케리그마와 비신화화’를 처음으로 번역했다. 유럽에 있을 때 그 댁에 찾아가기도 했다. 우리는 영의 세계를 믿는데, 그것을 표현하려면 이 세상적으로 표현할 수 밖에 없다. 영의 세계를 이 세상적으로 표현하는 것을 신화라고 한다. 희랍신화는 자기들 영적인 세계를 신화로 표현한 것이다. 영적인 세계를 표현하려면 이 세상 말로 표현할 수 밖에 없으니, 그것을 해석해야한다는게 불트만은 비신화화라고 했다. 가령 죽으면 천당간다고 하면 저 하늘에 천당이 있다고 생각하는데, 그게 아니라 천당은 영의 세계다. 복음을 학문적으로 눈 뜨게 한 것이 불투만 교수다. 그 다음에는 문화신학자인 폴틸리히의 영향을 받았다.”







유동식 교수가 젊은 시절 그린 그림. 사진 조현 기자



-영향 받은 한국인은 없었나.“해방 후 학병에서 돌아왔는데 신학교가 다 문을 닫았다. 감신대가 겨우 문을 열었는데, 일본인들이 다 가고나니 교수들이 없었다. 겨우 변홍규 박사 같은 몇 분이 가르쳤다. 다른 분들 강의는 일본에서 강의듣던데 비하면 너무도 형편없었다. 그런데 종로 와이엠시에이 강당에서 일요강좌가 있었다. 주 강사가 유영모, 함석헌이었다. 그 강의가 오후 1시부터 시작하니, 일요일 예배가 끝나면 점심도 안먹고 그리 달려갔다. 유영모는 독특한 용어를 써서 잘 못알아들었지만 함석헌은 달변에다가 한국사를 전공해서 한국적인 기독교 해석을 했다. 그 때 신학생들 치고 함석헌 영향을 받지않은 사람이 없었다.”-윤동주 시인과도 인연이 있었나.“연희전문 다닐때 같은 기숙사에 있었다. 얼굴이 하얗고 예의가 바르고 점잖은 신사였디. 사귀는 사람도 별로 없었다. 어떻게 보면 차원이 좀 달랐다. 일찍 깨달은 사람이다. 시의 세계에서 살수 있는 사람이었다. 시에서 보다시피 기독교 신앙 세계를 깨달은 사람이다. 쉽게 말하면 학생인데 도사였다. 그러니 일반사람들과 막 사귀지않았다. 그 세계에 통해야지 사귈 수 있었을테니까.”-화엄경의 사사무애 법계 등의 불교 이해 등을 책에서도 언급했는데, 어떻게 불교를 공부했나“해방 후 감리교신학교 기숙사에 있을때 이재각이란 룸메이트와 함께 이름있는 외래 강사들을 쫓아다녔다. 그때는 교수들이 시원치않으니, 이름있는 강사들을 서울시내 전역으로 쫓아다녀 듣는게 일반적인 경향이었다. 그 때 기독교의 함석헌처럼 뛰어난 이가 불교에서 탄허스님이었다. 탄허스님이 젊었을 때였는데 장자 강의를 했다. 남산 아래 사립대학에서 겨울방학에 하루에 두시간씩 했다. 추운 겨울에 강의하는 사람도 용코, 듣는 사람들도 용했다. 학생들이 교파를 막론하고 지식에 굶주려 있을 때라서 낮에 와이엠시에이의 함석헌 강의에 우르르 몰려가고, 밤엔 탄허의 장자강의에 우르르 몰려갔다. 함선생도 기독교지만 동양 고전 통한 입장에서 이야기하고, 탄허도 성경을 다 알고있었다. 그걸 들으면서 ‘아 서양 기독교만 있는게 아니구나’나라는 걸 알았다. 그 때부터 점점 뿌리를 캐다가 한국 종교사를 안 것이다. 탄허 스님이 장자를 강의하면서 화엄학을 자주 이야기했다. 우린 불행한 세대임에도 그렇게 다른 종교와 사상도 더불어 배워 회통할 수 있는 세대였다. 그게 큰 특징이다. 동양학 강의를 듣는게 성서를 보는 눈에 트는데 큰 도움이 됐다. 영원한 하나님이 진리인 이(理)법계라면, 생활은 사(事)법계다. 영원한 하나님 말씀이 역사 안에 들어오신 것이다. 화엄경의 이사무애법계를 모르면 성육신과 살아계신 하나님, 살아계신 그리스도를 이해못한다. 동양학자들이 포착한 도의 극치에 가면 다 통한다. 그게 삼교를 다 포함한다는 풍류도다. 풍류도를 표현한게 예술이다. 외래 종교 사상만 배운 최치원의 고민이 나의 고민과 같았다. 그래서 최치원이 우리 얼인 풍류도의 눈으로 유불도를 봤는데, 나는 풍류도의 눈으로 기독교를 보려고 했다. 그게 풍류신학이다.”-소금이란 호는 무슨 뜻인가.“원래는 호가 소석이었다. 힌돌이란 뜻이다. 전주 남문밖교회 고득순 목사가 지어줬다. 결혼식날을 잡아놨는데 한국전쟁이 터져서 천사원을 설립한 목사인 장인이 안방에서 주례를 해서 그냥 식을 올렸다. 그리고 난리통에 전주에 내려갔다. 고 목사님은 전주의 10대 한학자중 한분이었다. 사서삼경과 성경을 다 외우신 분이었다. 그 분이 소석이란 호를 지어줬는데, 힌돌은 묵시록에 나온 그리스도란 뜻이다. 예수님 발바닥도 못따라가는 내겐 너무 짐스러웠다. 그런데 도연명이 시를 읽다보고, 1년 사시사철 술에 취해 사는 도연명의 호 소금이 마음에 들어서 칠순부터 호를 소금으로 했다. 소금은 거문고를 거문고인데 줄을 달기 전의 거문고다. 기독교인은 기독교인인데 제 소리도 제대로 못내는 내게 걸맞는 호라고 생각했다.”-그 시대 신학자들은 대부분 목사 안수를 받지않았나.=한국전쟁 때 서울이 수복된 뒤 전주에서 돌아와 배화학교 교목으로 가야하는데, 목사가 아니니 종교주임을 했다. 감리교는 예전엔 목사 안수를 받을 때 금주 서약을 했다. 그런데 군에서 2년간 술을 많이 마셔서 버릇이 됐다. 지금도 여기에 맨 포도주잖아.그러나 과음하는 것도 아니고 개인적으로는 술 마신다고 죄 될게 없는데라고 생각은 했지만, 거짓말을 할 수가 없어서 목사 안수를 포기했다. 감신대 신학교 기숙사에 있을때도 룸메이트하고 술도 마시고, 감리교신학교인 미국 보스턴신학교에서도 보니 학생들이 몰래 술을 다 마시고는 있었다. 지금은 안수 때 금주 규정이 없어졌다. 그런데도 그때는 그런 규정이 있어서, 술을 못끊을 것 같아서 나를 속일 수 없어 안수를 안받았다.-코로나19 바이러스의 의미는“나는 평생 연세대교회를 다녔는데, 주일날마다 교회 모이는 것이 내 삶의 중심이다. 코로나로 이게 중단돼 버렸다. 그래서 코로나를 마귀라고 생각한다. 인간관계를 끊어버리니, 현대판 마귀 아니냐. 일요일날 천안에 사는 아들이 오면 함께 성경 한장 읽고 예배 드린다. 공동체 예배를 회복해달라고 기도를 한다. 그러나 지금 고난은 참 하나님을 찾게 하는 은사이기도 하다. 나를 비롯해 대부분의 사람들이 습관적으로 교회에 다니며 건성으로 신앙했다. 그런데 남의 소리 듣고 감동 받는 것도 좋지만, 각자의 신앙을 발견하는 계기가 될거다. 가령 교회에서 무슨 소리인줄도 모르고 주기도문을 외운 사람이 혼자서 한글자 한글자 생각하게 될수 있다.”-건강 비결은.

“사람들이 장수의 비결이 뭐냐고 자주 묻는데, 하나님이 살려주시니 사는 것이다. 가난한 왜정시대에 학병 끌려가 죽을뻔했고, 한국전쟁때도 죽을 뻔 한 것을 살려주신 구원의 역사에 감사한다. 1남1녀를 뒀는데, 딸은 일찌기 미국으로 이민 갔는데 먼저 세상을 떴고, 천안에서 건축업을 하며 사는 아들이 한주일에 한번씩 먹을 걸 냉장고에 넣어두고 간다. 아침에 일어나면 스트레칭을 30분 하고, 기도를 한 뒤에 생식을 두유에 타서 먹고 화장실에 다녀오면 아침 8시가 된다. 평생 그렇게 산다”







대문 밖에서 배웅하는 유동식 교수. 사진 조현 기자



-100세신데, 죽음을 어떻게 생각하나.“저사람(부인)이 암 4년을 앓고 세상을 뜨면서 19개의 시를 썼다. 마지막으로 죽음을 내다보면서 쓴 19번째 시가 ‘제3의 생일’이다. ‘육체로 태어나게 해준 생일을 주셔서 감사합니다. 두번째는 세례를 받고, 새사람으로 태어나게 해주셔서 감사합니다. 이제는 이 세상을 떠나서 하늘나라에서 살게 해주시니 감사합니다.’라고 썼다. 나한테는 아주 감동이다. 죽음이 바로 새로운 삶의 시작이다. 죽음을 생일로 본거다. 나도 같은 생각이다.”-외로움은 어떻게 극복하나.“사람들이 그걸 많이 물어보는데, 난 외로운걸 모른다. 저사람이 갔어도 내가 혼자 있다는 생각이 안든다. 저 사람이 시로 읊었지만 하늘나라에 살아있어서 거기서 여기 들락날락하고, 나는 여기서 거기를 들락날락하니, 혼자 있다는 생긱이 들지않는다.”

- 조현 종교전문기자 cho@hani.co.kr



출처 : 휴심정

기일원론(氣一元論) - 한국민족문화대백과사전

기일원론(氣一元論) - 한국민족문화대백과사전

기일원론 (氣一元論)

===

유교 개념 - 우주만물이 기에 의해 생성되고 존재한다는 성리학이론.

태허 뜻: ‘하늘’을 달리 이르는 말.

태허 뜻: ‘하늘’을 달리 이르는 말., 중국 철학에서, 음양을 낳는 기(氣)의 본체를 달리 이르는 [국어 사전]

 태허의 의미

1 태허 太虛 : ‘하늘’을 달리 이르는 말.

2 태허 太虛 : 중국 철학에서, 음양을 낳는 기(氣)의 본체를 달리 이르는 말. 송나라 장횡거(張橫渠)가 주장한 개념으로 이것이 응집되어 만물이 되고, 만물은 분해하여 이것이 된다고 한다.

===

태허

https://auto.fandom.com/ko/wiki/%ED%83%9C%ED%97%88

태허 [太虛]는 북송대의 성리학자인 장재(張載：1020~77)가 우주만물의 근원이 되는 일기(一氣)를 가리킨 개념이다. 하늘을 달리 이르는 말이다. 무극이 곧 태극(太極) 이라고 해석한다. 주희의 사상에 큰 영향을 준 장횡거(장재 張載,張橫渠 )는 이를 태허(太虛)로 해석하는데, 태허는 텅 빈 것이 아니라 이미 기(氣)로 충만한 터전인 것이다.

태허는 장자 〈莊子〉 지북유(知北遊)에 처음 나오는 말로서 만물을 포함하고 있는 거대한 공간, 구체적으로는 천공(天空)을 뜻하는 것이었다. 태허가 이러한 공간적 의미를 떠나 형이상학적 본체로서의 의미를 갖게 된 것은 장재에 의해 '태허즉기'(太虛卽氣)의 명제가 확립되면서부터이다.

장재는 만물의 생성과 소멸을 기(氣)의 모임과 흩어짐에 의해 설명했다. 기가 모이면 만물이 생기며, 만물이 사라지면 기가 흩어진다. 기가 흩어진 상태를 허(虛)라고 하며, 근원적인 허의 상태를 태허라 한다. 따라서 태허라는 것은 기가 흩어져 있는 우주 만물의 근원적 모습을 가리키는 것이다. 이 태허는 기가 흩어져 있는 것이지 기가 없어진 것은 아니기 때문에 허무(虛無) 또는 공무(空無)와는 다른 것이며, 그런 점에서 '태허즉기'의 명제는 '유(有)는 무(無)로부터 생긴다'는 노장적 우주생성론을 부정하는 것이었다.

우리나라의 기일원론 철학을 대표하는 서경덕(徐敬德)의 사상에서도 태허는 만물의 근원이 되는 형이상학적 본체를 가리키는 개념으로 사용되었다. 서경덕은 그의 태허설에서 "태허는 담연무형(淡然無形)이다. 이것을 선천(先天)이라 부르는데 그 크기는 바깥이 없고 그 앞에는 시작도 없으며 그 온 바는 궁구할 수 없다. 그 담연하여 허하고 정(靜)함이 기의 체(體)이다"라고 했으며, 또 "태허는 허하면서 허하지 않다. 허는 곧 기이다. 허는 끝이 없고 커서 바깥이 없다. 이미 허라고 말하면 어떻게 이것을 기라고 말할 수 있을까. 이를테면 허하고 정한 것은 기의 체요, 모이고 흩어지는 것은 기의 용(用)이다"라고 했다. 이는 '태허즉기'라는 장재의 명제를 받아들이면서, 그것을 기의 체용과 관련해 설명하는 것이었다. 서경덕은 만물의 형이상학적 본체를 기라고 보고, 기가 아직 작용하기 이전의 본질을 기의 체라 했으며 기가 모이고 흩어짐으로써 일어나는 천지 만물의 생성을 기의 용이라 했다. 기의 체가 곧 선천이며 태허인 것이다.

===

===

===

===

===

===

===

태허(太虛 1889~1947) : 현대 중국불교 개혁을 주도한 사상가 / 김제란 < 현대불교의 스승 10인 < 불교평론

태허(太虛 1889~1947) : 현대 중국불교 개혁을 주도한 사상가 / 김제란 < 현대불교의 스승 10인 < 특집 < 기사본문 - 불교평론

태허(太虛 1889~1947) : 현대 중국불교 개혁을 주도한 사상가 / 김제란
기자명 김제란
입력 2023.04.06 

특집 | 세계를 가르친 현대불교의 스승 10인


동양의 근대는 아편전쟁(1840년)과 청일전쟁(1894년)으로 대변되듯, 서양 제국주의 세력이 동양으로 침범해 들어오던 서세동점(西勢東漸)의 시대로, 동서양 문화와 사상이 정면으로 부딪치며 갈등 · 융합하던 시기였다. 이 시기 중국의 대표적 지식인이었던 양계초(梁啓超, 1873~1929)는 동서양을 포함하여 세계사상사에서 가장 중요한 사상가로 석가, 공자, 소크라테스, 칸트를 들었다. 근대 이후로는 마르틴 루터, 베이컨, 데카르트를 근세의 성인(聖人)으로 꼽았는데, 이들 사상의 중요성을 높이 평가한 엄복의 견해를 따른 것이다.

이 중 마르틴 루터(M. Luther, 1483~1546)는 기독교 내부의 대규모 개혁운동을 시작한 종교철학자이자 개혁가로서, 그를 전후하여 중세와 근대를 나눌 정도로 세계사에 결정적인 영향을 미쳤던 인물이다. 그런데 근대 중국 불교계에도 ‘마르틴 루터’로 불리는 사상가이자 개혁가가 등장하였으니, 그가 바로 태허(太虛, 1889~1947) 대사이다. 태허의 불교개혁 운동이 마르틴 루터의 가톨릭 비판과 신교 수립만큼이나 중요하고 큰 영향을 미쳤다고 본 것이다.



중국 전통불교에 기반한 개혁의 길

근대 시기 사상가이자 개혁가로서 태허의 역할을 이해하기 위해서는 먼저 그 시기의 사상적 배경을 알아야 할 것이다. 근대 시기 전통 철학의 주요한 부분인 불교는 서양철학에 대항하는 사상적 무기로서 역할과 동서문화 교류의 계합점이라는 이중의 역할을 수행하였다. 그리고 이 이중의 역할은 세 가지 흐름으로 나타났다.

첫째는 유식불교의 등장이다. 유식불교의 부활을 주장하는 구양경무(歐陽竟無, 1871~1943), 여징(呂澂, 1896~1989) 등 남경내학원 학자들은 유식불교의 이성적 · 사변적인 논리 정신이 서양철학의 유입에 대응하는 최상의 방법이며, 불교가 서양과 중국 전통 철학의 계합적 역할을 할 수 있다고 생각하였다. 둘째는 중국 전통불교의 옹호이다. 태허, 은태여(殷太如) 등 무창불학원 학자들은 진여연기론에 기반을 둔 전통 중국불교가 서양의 충격에 대응하고 동양 우수성의 근거가 될 것이라고 보았다. 셋째는 불교의 유학화이다. 유식불교와 중국 전통불교를 옹호하는 학자들 간의 논쟁은 많은 철학적 논의를 불러일으켰고, 불교와 유학을 결합시켜 서양에 대응하는 독창적인 길을 여는 계기가 되었다. 웅십력(熊十力, 1885~1968) 등 현대 신불가(新佛家)들은 유식불교를 비판하며 중국 전통불교를 유학화시켰는데, 이는 중국불교의 진여연기론을 발전시킨 철학이다.

이러한 세 흐름 중에서 태허는 두 번째 유형을 대표하는 학자이다. 실제로 중국 불교계에서는 태허의 스승인 양문회(楊文會, 1837~1911)가 일실되었던 유식학 문헌들을 간행한 일이 계기가 되어 유식불교가 크게 유행하였다. 규기의 《성유식론술기》가 간행된 뒤, 양문회는 구양경무와 매광희(梅光羲, 1880~1947) 등을 격려하여 유식불교를 연구하게 하였고, 여기에 태허와 한청정(韓淸淨, 1884~1949) 등이 합류하였다. 이러한 흐름은 여징은 물론 강유위(康有爲, 1858~1927), 장태염(章太炎, 1869~1936), 담사동(譚嗣同, 1865~1898), 양계초, 양수명(梁漱溟, 1893~1988), 웅십력 등 당시 거의 모든 불교학자에게 큰 영향을 주었다.

유식불교는 인도불교에 속하고, 중국 전통불교는 《대승기신론》 계통의 천태 · 화엄 · 선불교이다. 《대승기신론》에 사상적 바탕을 둔 중국불교는 중국 고유 사상인 맹자의 성선설(性善說)을 흡수하여, 인간이 본래 불성을 가지고 있고 종교적 실천을 통하여 그 불성의 깨달음에 도달할 수 있다고 주장한다. 불교에서 엄격한 논리체계를 가진 철학적 측면보다 수행과 관련된 종교적 측면을 강조한 것이다. 이에 불교가 서양철학과 대응할 수 있는 철학적 논리체계에 비중을 두어야 하는지, 아니면 전통 중국불교의 깨달음에 기반을 둔 종교성을 강조해야 하는지의 문제가 대두하게 되었다. 여기에서 인도 유식불교의 계보를 이은 현장－규기 계열의 유식불교를 진정한 불교철학으로 볼 것인가, 아니면 《대승기신론》 계통의 전통불교를 진정한 불교철학으로 볼 것인가 하는 논쟁이 생겨났다. 서양문화의 충격으로 전통 철학을 반성하게 되는 지성적이고 비판적인 분위기에서 지적인 이해가 없는 신앙은 의미가 없다고 생각하는 구양경무 등 내학원 학자들은 신앙을 강조하는 《대승기신론》을 비판하고, 유식불교에 이끌렸다. 반면에 《대승기신론》이 중국불교의 핵심이라고 생각하는 태허 등 무창불학원 학자들은 전통불교를 비판하는 것은 중국의 정신 자체를 비판하는 것이라는 생각에서 전통불교를 옹호하였다.

태허는 전통불교의 입장에서 불교개혁과 재생에 선봉 역할을 하였던 실천적 승려이다. 그는 선종의 사상이 중국불교 개혁의 최대의 정신적 동력이라고 주장하고, “중국불교만이 불교의 핵심을 파악하였다”고 중국불교를 높이 평가하였다. 논리적, 철학적인 접근을 강조하는 구양경무의 입장은 유식불교를 지향하게 되고, 철학적인 접근과 함께 종교적인 접근을 강조하는 태허의 입장은 중국불교를 지향하게 된다.

실제로 태허는 《대승기신론》이 가지고 있는 종교적인 성격을 옹호하였다. 태허가 보는 진여는 《대승기신론》에서의 진여와 같이 ‘절대부동성(絶對不動性)’과 더불어 ‘수연(隨緣)’의 측면을 동시에 가지고 있는 것으로 나타난다. 그는 법성과 법상을 통일하는 논리를 제시하고, 유식불교와 《대승기신론》은 여러 차별성을 가지고 있음에도 불구하고 궁극적으로는 하나라는 원교적인 입장을 취한다. 그는 불교의 새로운 이론을 제기하지는 않았다. 단지 불교의 다양한 종파들의 특징을 결합하여 유식불교와 화엄 · 천태 불교를 조화시키고자 하였다. 이것은 《대승기신론》의 진여연기론의 합리성을 강조하고 이를 우회적으로 변호하기 위한 방편이었다.



《대승기신론》 논쟁에서 보는 태허 사상

이러한 차이는 근본적으로 ‘진여(眞如)’의 성격을 어떻게 볼 것인가 하는 견해차에서 비롯되었다. ‘진여는 활동하는가?’라는 문제에 대해 구양경무는 ‘절대부동(絶對不動)’의 측면을, 태허는 ‘인연에 따른 움직임(隨緣)’을 강조하였던 것이다. 구양경무는 유식불교에 근거하여 진여와 정지(正智)를 구분하였는데, 진여는 본체이고 아무리 오염된 종자가 사라졌다고 해도 깨달은 상태인 정지는 현상에 불과하기 때문이다. 구양경무에게 진여는 생성 소멸되지 않는 절대적인 실체이고, 진여와 정지는 서로 차원이 다른 영역에 속한다. 구양경무의 이러한 논의는 진여의 절대성을 강조하려는 의도에서 나온 것이다. 반면 태허는 《대승기신론》의 주장을 그대로 받아들여, 현상계의 모든 것은 진여의 표현이며, 진여는 생성 소멸하는 부동의 실체가 아니라 인연에 따라 움직이는 활동성을 가진다고 주장하였다.

이는 사실상 ‘진여의 훈습(薰習)’이라는 문제와 연관된다. 구양경무가 보기에, 진여는 고요하고 활동성이 없으며 현상을 뛰어넘는 초월적인 것이므로 결코 훈습의 대상이 될 수 없다. 그러면 “더러운 현상이 깨끗한 진여에서 나온다는 모순”이 생겨나게 된다는 것이다. 더러운 현실 세계를 개선하기 위해서는 ‘완전하고 깨끗한 절대적인 진여’라는 분명한 목표가 필요하다고 생각했던 것이다. 이에 반하여 태허는 《대승기신론》이 제창한 진여연기론의 합리성을 강조하였다. 태허의 관심사는 진여 그 자체가 절대부동한 것이 아니라 어떤 방식으로든지 생동감을 가지고 현실에 투영될 수 있는 논리(인연에 따라 움직이는 진여)를 개발하는 것이었다. 그를 위해서 진여가 활동성을 가질 필요가 있었던 것이다. 그래서 태허는 연기(緣起)의 주체를 더러운 망식(妄識)의 성격을 갖는 아라야식이 아니라, 진여와 진여의 활동을 동시에 설명할 수 있는 아타나식[진망화합식(眞妄和合識)]으로 설정하였다.

또한 “《대승기신론》과 유식불교는 회통할 수 있는가?”라는 물음에 대해 구양경무와 달리 태허는 근본적인 입장에서 보면 둘은 일치한다고 보았다. 태허가 보기에, 유식불교는 차별적인 현상 세계는 이론적으로 잘 설명하고 있지만 실천적인 평등 진여의 진실성을 잘 보여주지 못하고 있다. 그리하여 “차별의 형상을 떠나 일체법의 진여 실성을 나타내 보일 수 있다면, 그것을 유식 법성이라고 부른다”고 하며, 유식불교와 《대승기신론》이 근본에서 일치한다고 주장하였다. 실제로 태허는 기본적으로 중관불교는 물론 유식불교, 그리고 《대승기신론》을 하나로 보는 원교적(圓敎的)인 입장을 취하였다. 이런 입장은 《대승기신론》과 중국불교의 내재적 관계를 생각해볼 때, 중국불교의 근본인 《대승기신론》이 뒤엎어지면 근대 시기에 서양의 도전에 맞대응할 동력을 잃게 되리라는 깊은 우려에서 나온 주장이었다.



태허의 생애와 이력

태허는 1889년 중국 절강성 숭덕에서 태어났고 속명은 여폐림(呂沛林)이었다. 태어난 다음 해 아버지가 병사하였고 어머니도 그가 어렸을 때 개가하여, 조부모 슬하에서 자랐다. 1904년 16세에 선불교 임제파에 속하는 영파 천동사(天童寺)에서 출가하였다. 출가 이후 은사 스님은 그가 허약하여 건강하기를 바라는 마음에서 태허(太虛)라는 이름을 지어주었다고 한다. 도교에 독실한 외할머니의 영향으로 그는 1904년 그는 사찰에서 전통불교를 공부하는 외에도 당시 젊은이들이 많이 보았던 톨스토이, 바쿠닌, 프루동 등의 사회성 짙은 글들을 탐독하였다. 또한 당시 서세동점의 시대적 고민을 짊어지고 있던 청년 지식인들을 격동시켰던 글들을 빠짐없이 읽었다. 태허 자신의 말에 따르면, “민국이 성립되기 4년 전인 1908년부터 민국 3년, 1914년까지 강유위의 《대동서》, 담사동(譚嗣同)의 《인학(仁學)》, 손문의 《삼민주의》, 엄복의 《천연론》, 장태염의 《오무론》 《민보》, 양계초의 《신민총보》 등의 영향을 받았다. 선종, 《반야경》, 천태를 통한 불교 이해로써 불교 혁신운동을 전개하였다.” 이러한 면학의 분위기 속에서 태허의 불교 혁신 사고가 싹텄다고 할 수 있다.

1909년 태허는 양인산(楊仁山) 거사가 설립한 금릉각경처 내 교육기관인 ‘기원정사’에 입학하였다. 당시 10명 남짓한 학생 가운데 절반 정도가 승려였는데, 이후 중국 근대 불교계의 양대 산맥이라 할 구양경무와 태허가 양인산의 제자로서 그곳에서 함께 수학하였다. 구양경무는 거사로서 재야의 불교 연구를 대표하였고, 태허는 승려로서 출가자를 대표하였다. 그곳에서는 양인산 거사가 직접 《능엄경》을 가르쳤고, 소만수(蘇曼殊. 1884~1918)가 서양 학문에 접근할 수단인 영어를 가르쳤다. 그러나 반년 만에 기원정사는 문을 닫았고, 태허는 양주의 승려사범학당에서 공부를 계속하였다.

1911년 신해혁명이 일어나자 태허는 불교협진회를 설립하였으나, 신구 대립이 심해서 불교개혁의 첫 시도는 실패하였다. 당시 혼란을 타개하려던 고승 경안(敬安, 1851~1912)이 입적하자 태허는 ‘나와 불교의 인연이 이렇게 끝나는가’라고 생각하며 방황하였다. 고승 인광(印光, 1861~1949)의 도움으로 보타산 법우사에서 은둔하면서 그는 3년 동안 참선 · 예불하고 경전을 읽으며 자신의 내면을 깊이 들여다보았다. 《능엄경》 《대승기신론》 등을 다시 새롭게 읽었으며, 엄복이 번역한 서양 사회과학 책들도 탐독하였다. 실제로 태허는 자신이 엄복과 장태염 사상의 영향을 많이 받았다고 자술하고 있다. 1917년, 3년 만에 은둔에서 벗어난 태허는 확실히 방향이 섰고 더 이상 방황할 일이 없었다. 1918년부터 그는 불교개혁운동에 본격적으로 나섰다.



불교의 3대 혁명:
‘불교 교리 혁명’ ‘승단제도 혁명’ ‘불교 재산 혁명’

태허가 가장 먼저 한 일은 상해에 ‘각사(覺社)’를 창립하는 것이었다. 각사 창립에는 그가 존경하던 장태염 등 재가 불교인들도 많이 참여하였다. 각사는 불교개혁 운동의 근거지로서 불교 수행과 연구, 그리고 불교잡지를 간행하는 일을 주된 업무로 삼고자 하였다. 1920년에는 각사에서 발간하던 《각사총간》을 《해조음(海潮音)》으로 개칭하였는데, 당시 시대 문제에 대해 매우 적극적으로 논의를 전개하며 불교 계몽을 이끌었다.

태허는 “나는 우연히 불교 혁명사상가들과 가까이 지내게 되었다. 불교계에 혁명이 일어나자, 나는 상해혁명의 흐름에서 ‘불교 교리 혁명’ ‘승단제도 혁명’ ‘불교 재산 혁명’이라는 깃발을 내걸었다”고 하였다(〈나의 불교혁명 실패사〉).

그는 첫째, 제거해야 할 대상으로 통치자들이 미신을 이용하여 국민을 속이는 것을 지목하였다. 또한 중국 가족제도가 배양해온 법맥 제도, 즉 사찰 재산을 개인적으로 상속하는 제도를 정면으로 반대하였다. 사찰 재산을 개인적으로 상속하는 것은 불교가 추구하는 공(空)의 생활에 정면으로 반하는 일이라고 생각하였다.

둘째, 개혁해야 할 대상으로, 불교가 현실 세계에 무관심한 ‘산(山)속 불교’의 형태를 취하고 산속에 숨는 일을 비판하였다. 불교가 죽음의 문제만 중요하게 생각하고 귀신을 받드는 일만 생각하는 종교에서 사람에게 봉사하고 살아 있는 사람들의 삶의 현장들을 돌보는 종교로 변화할 것을 주장하였다.

셋째, 건설해야 할 목표로서, ① 인생불교를 건설하는 것, ② 현대 중국사회의 환경에 맞는 출가 승단을 건설하는 것, ③ 재가 신도를 조직화하여 단체를 건립하는 것, ④ 농업, 공업, 상업, 군사, 정치, 예술 등 사회 각층에 종사하는 사람들을 불교의 ‘열 가지 선(十善)’으로 융화시켜 중국 민족 및 전 세계가 십선문화를 이루도록 한다는 것을 제기하였다.

태허가 주장하는 교리, 제도, 사찰경제를 중심으로 한 불교혁명은 사실은 손문(孫文, 1866~1925)의 ‘삼민주의(三民主義)’와 궤를 같이하는 것이었다. 태허 자신도 “중국 혁명에서 세계적 국민혁명으로 나아가는 데에는 삼민주의가 있고, 중국불교의 세계적 불교화와 불교혁명에는 ‘삼불주의(三佛主義)’가 있다”고 하였다. 손문의 삼민주의는 민족주의(民族主義), 민권주의(民權主義), 민생주의(民生主義)로서, 민족을 중심으로 하고 국민의 권리와 국민의 삶을 중심으로 한다는 원칙에 근거하여 사회 변혁을 이루어가야 한다는 것이다. 이것이 불교에 적용된 것이 바로 삼불주의로서, 태허가 말한 불교혁명의 세 원칙인 이상적인 출가 승단의 성립, 이상적인 재가 신도 단체의 설립, 그리고 정신과 물질의 생산과 발전이 이에 해당한다.

그러나 태허는 죽을 때까지 중국불교의 부흥을 위해 노력했지만, 전쟁과 혁명을 통해 중국이 겪은 경제적, 정치적 혼란 때문에 그의 시도들은 큰 성공을 거두지는 못하였다. 그는 1947년 3월 12일 상해 옥불사(玉佛寺)에서 입적하였다. 그의 저술, 인터뷰 등을 모은 《태허대사전집(太虛大師全集)》(1-12집)이 있고, 인순(仁順, 1906~2005)과 동초(東初, 1907~1977) 등의 제자가 있다.



참여불교: 승려의 전쟁 참여에 대한 논의

중국 국민당 정부는 1946년 태허에게 항일전쟁 승리 훈장을 수여하였고, 다음 해 그가 세상을 떠나자 태허의 업적을 기리는 글을 발표하였다. “태허는 항전 시절 승려들을 독려해 구호대를 조직하였다. 승려들이 가사에서 군복으로 갈아입기까지 그의 공이 매우 컸다. 그는 1928년 이래 수십 년간 항일의 뜻을 굽히지 않았으니, 호국의 공이 가상하다.”

1931년 일본군이 만주를 침략하였을 때도 태허는 〈대만과 조선, 일본의 4천만 불교도들에게 보내는 성명서〉를 발표하였다.

일본과 조선, 대만의 불교도들은 붓다의 구세 정신을 계승할 의무가 있다. 모두 일어나 군벌을 폐출하고 전쟁을 제지하여 세계평화 구현에 앞장서야 한다.

만주사변 2년 후, 상해사변이 발발하자 태허는 승려로서 산속에서 염불만 할 것이 아니라 현실에 참여할 것을 적극 권하였다. 전국의 청년 불자들에게 ‘불교청년호국단’ 조직을 권하였고, 종군과 모금, 선전 활동을 독려하는 등 구체적인 행동으로 나아갔다. 그 때문에 ‘정치 승려’라는 비판을 많이 받았다. 이에 대해 당시의 저명한 문학가 노신(魯迅, 1881~1936)은 “많은 사람들이 태허를 정치 승려라고 깎아내리지만, 가당치 않은 말이다. 태허는 ‘근대 화상’이라는 말이 잘 어울린다. 온갖 명성을 누리면서도 큰스님의 위엄은 한 조각도 찾기 힘들고, 봄바람처럼 모두를 푸근하게 해준다. 그의 말이라면 무엇을 해도 도리에서 어긋나지 않을 것이다.”라고 평하였다.

항일전쟁이 본격화되고 국공연합이 결성되자 중국 정부는 전국의 승려들에게 징집령을 내렸다. 이러한 정부의 방침에 대해 승려들 사이에서는 격렬한 찬반 논쟁이 벌어졌다. 정부 방침에 찬성하는 이들은 “우리도 국민의 한 부분이다. 국민 병역의 의무가 있다.”라고 하였고, 반대하는 이들은 “우리는 이미 출가해서 붓다의 자비를 봉행하는 사람들이다. 전선에서 적을 살상하는 것은 불교 교리에 어긋난다.”고 주장하였다. 태허는 훈련총감부에 서신을 보내 “승려들끼리 훈련을 받겠다. 복장은 우리에게 맡겨라. 간편하되 원형은 유지하고 싶다. 두 가지 사항만 허락하면 일반인과 똑같이 훈련에 참여하겠다. 단 훈련을 마친 후 전투부대에는 배속시키지 말아달라.”고 청하였다. 정부에서는 태허의 요청을 수용하였다.

그 뒤 태허는 전국 사찰에 다음과 같은 공문을 보냈다.

국가가 위기에 처했다. 우리는 출가한 몸이지만, 국가를 뒤로하지는 않는다. 신해혁명 이후 계속된 우리의 근대화는 일본의 파괴에 직면했다. 비분을 가눌 길 없다. 비바람이 외로운 등불을 꺼뜨리려 한다. 목탁을 두드리며 희생된 항일 전사를 추모하는 것만이 능사가 아니다. 정부의 통일된 지휘 하에 난민 구호와 전쟁 지식을 습득하기 바란다. 몸을 던져 국가와 인민을 구하는 것이 붓다의 가르침을 실현하는 길이다. 의학 상식과 군 기본동작을 익히고, 삼민주의와 정치사상 같은 학과도 소홀히 하지 마라. 밥값은 각자 부담하고 부족한 부분은 사찰에서 지원하라.

이러한 태허의 말에 따라 전국의 사찰에는 승려 훈련반이 발족하였다. 태허 사상이 철저한 참여불교적 성격을 띠고 있음을 분명히 보여주는 예라고 할 수 있다.



태허의 ‘인생불교’와 인순의 ‘인간불교’

태허의 사상은 한마디로 ‘인생불교’ 사상이라고 할 수 있다. 태허의 제자인 인순의 ‘인간불교’도 태허의 인생불교에 근거한 것이다. “태허가 말한 인생불교는 귀신과 죽음을 중시하는 중국불교를 겨냥하여 제기된 것이다. 나는 인도불교의 천화(天化), 즉 신화(神化)의 정도가 너무 심각하고 또 중국불교에 깊은 영향을 미쳤기 때문에 ‘인생’이 아니라 ‘인간’을 말하였다. 중국불교가 신화에서 탈피하여 현실의 인간에게 돌아오기를 바란다.” 태허는 중국불교가 가진 귀신과 죽음을 중시하는 성향을 인생, 즉 인간의 현실의 삶으로 극복해낼 수 있다고 보았고, 인순은 더 나아가 인간을 위한 불교를 주장하였던 것이다.

실제로 태허는 불교 각 종파의 불신관을 모두 받아들였다. 이 중에는 역사적 붓다 외에도 붓다를 이상화하고 인격적 요소를 내포하는 천신화된 붓다의 성격도 포함되어 있다. 태허 사상은 전통불교에 기반하였기에 그가 생각하는 붓다는 인간인 동시에 천신(天神)의 요소도 일부 가지고 있는 반면에, 인순이 긍정하는 붓다는 역사적 인간으로서 붓다가 중심이 된다. 이는 기독교에서 예수를 역사상 실존 인물인 동시에 신의 아들로 봄으로써 신적인 요소를 강조하는 종교적 입장과 역사상 실존하는 인간으로만 보는 신학의 차이에 비견할 만한 차이이다. 이것이 스승 태허의 인생불교와 제자 인순의 인간불교의 차이이다.

태허는 “인간이 사는 이곳에서 성불한다(卽人成佛)”라는 입장을 철저히 하였고, 인간을 벗어난 초현실적인 어떤 세계에도 깊은 관심을 두지 않았다. 〈중국불교를 개혁하려는 혁명승들에게 주는 가르침〉이라는 글에서 “인간에서 보살로, 그리고 부처로 나아가는 인생불교를 건설하자”고 주장하였다.

이러한 인간 중심, 즉 현세의 살아 있는 인간에 관심을 둔 태허 사상에서 보면, 정토종의 ‘정토’에 대한 인식이 좋을 수는 없었다. 정토는 우리가 살고 있는 ‘이 세상’이 아니라 ‘저 세상’에 대한 관념이기 때문이다. 그는 정토종을 현실화하려고 시도하였다. “오늘 오염된 중국을 중국의 깨끗한 땅인 정토로 바꾸는 것이 얼마나 어려운가? 그러나 인간은 이러한 마음의 힘과 정토를 만들 능력이 있으니, 이 세상을 순수한 땅으로 만들기 위해 노력하자”고 제안하였다. 그의 실천적, 제도적 개혁 시도는 정부의 종교 정책이나 불교계 내부의 의견 통합의 어려움 등 여러 요인들로 인해 성공하지 못하였다. 그러나 죽음과 귀신 등 저 세상에 대한 관심이 아니라 지금 이 땅에서의 인간의 삶을 중시하는 그의 ‘인생불교’ 사상은 이후 인간을 중심으로 인간이 사는 이 세상의 개혁과 혁명을 시도하려는 인순의 ‘인간불교’ 사상으로 발전해갔다.

결국 중국 근대불교의 대표자라고 할 태허의 사상은 전통불교에 근거하되 인간의 삶을 중심에 놓고 그를 지향하는 ‘인생불교’라고 할 수 있다. 그의 참여불교적인 실천과 개혁적 시도 모두 인생불교 사상에 근거하였다. 태허의 인생불교는 마르틴 루터의 종교개혁처럼 불교를 인간 중심의 종교로 받아들이게 한 근대적 변혁이었고, 중국 전통을 바탕으로 서양의 사상 · 문화를 보조적으로 받아들인 중체서용(中體西用)의 불교라고 할 수 있다. ■



김제란 redhairran@hanmail.net

고려대 철학과 졸업(철학박사). 태동고전연구소(지곡서당) 한문연수과정 수료. 고려대 철학연구소 및 동국대 불교문화연구소 연구초빙교수 역임. 박사학위 논문은 《熊十力 哲學思想 硏究－동서 문화의 충돌과 중국 전통철학의 대응》. 주요 논문으로 〈한 · 중 · 일 근대불교의 사회진화론에 대한 대응양식 비교〉 〈당군의 철학에 나타난 동서융합의 논리－유학, 헤겔철학과 화엄불교의 융합〉 등과 저서로 《원효의 대승기신론 소 · 별기》 등이 있다. 현재 고려대 철학과 강의교수.

The real Jesus : the misguided quest for the historical Jesus : Johnson, Luke Timothy : Internet Archive

The real Jesus : the misguided quest for the historical Jesus and the truth of the traditional Gospels : Johnson, Luke Timothy : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

The real Jesus : the misguided quest for the historical Jesus and the truth of the traditional Gospels

by Johnson, Luke Timothy

Publication date 1996

Topics Jesus Chri

===


The Real Jesus: The Misguided Quest for the Historical Jesus and the Truth of the Traditional Go Paperback – 4 June 1997
by Luke Timothy Johnson (Author)
4.2 4.2 out of 5 stars 75 ratings


The Real Jesus—the first book to challenge the findings of the Jesus Seminar, the controversial group of two hundred scholars who claim Jesus only said 18 percent of what the Gospels attribute to him—"is at the center of the newest round in what has been called the Jesus Wars" (Peter Steinfels, New York Times). Drawing on the best biblical and historical scholarship, respected New Testament scholar Luke Timothy Johnson demonstrates that the "real Jesus" is the one experienced in the present through faith rather than the one found in speculative historical reconstructions. A new preface by the author presents his point of view on the most recent rounds of this lively debate.

==

Top reviews from other countries

watzizname

3.0 out of 5 stars What This Apologist Ought to Apologize For, and What He Needn't

Reviewed in the United States on 5 November 2012

Verified Purchase

Professor Luke Timothy Johnson makes it clear as early as the introduction to REAL that he seriously disagrees with the Jesus Seminar, and that criticism of the Seminar and its output will be a major focus of the book. He is altogether right to do so, and it is to his credit that he tells the reader at the outset where he is coming from. It is appropriate that I do the same at the outset of this review. I joined a Universalist congregation in 1953, and since the merger of the UCA with the AUA in 1961 I have been a UU. As such, I believe in the right and duty of each of us to consider questions of faith and make up our own minds. I believe in, to quote from the Washington Declaration of Faith of the UCA, "the authority of truth known or to be known." This means I hold to no dogma; everything I believe is subject to refutation in the light of new knowledge, or knowledge that is new to me.

The Seminar has discussed each saying attributed to Jesus in the four canonical gospels and the gospel of Thomas, and has placed each in one of four categories, and published a book,  The Five Gospels: What Did Jesus Really Say? The Search for the Authentic Words of Jesus , in which sayings are printed in red, pink, gray, or black, based on the degree of confidence the voting members expressed in the authenticity of each saying. (The previous sentence is far from the whole story; a complete and accurate description is far too long to include here, but the process is explained fully in Robert Miller's  The Jesus Seminar and Its Critics .

Prof. Johnson begins his case in chapter one, "First, it is a process biased against the authenticity of the Gospel traditions. It is in the very nature of scholars to vie with one another to be `harder graders.' The procedure forces sayings to PROVE their authenticity, rather than their authenticity being assumed and the burden of proof being placed on showing inauthenticity." [p. 5, Emphasis in original, but as italics, which Amazon's text box does not preserve, so I have used caps instead.] Prof. Johnson asserts these three claims without offering a shred of evidence. I can accept the second statement (scholars vie) as very probably true, but I do not believe that the process is biased either for or against authenticity, and I am quite certain that no saying is capable of presenting a rigorous proof of its own authenticity, nor does the Seminar's procedure require such. It is because of the very fact that no rigorous logical proof of the authenticity or inauthenticity of any of the sayings attributed to Jesus is possible, that the Seminar resorted to the voting procedure to arrive at a reasonable estimate of how confident the members are (or aren't) of each saying's authenticity. To assume authenticity is inherently biased in favor thereof, and would be as inappropriate as to assume inauthenticity, which is probably why the Seminar quite properly chose to do neither.

On page 6, Prof. Johnson says of the late Robert Funk, a founder of the Seminar, "More specifically, he objects to the way television evangelists have `preyed on the ignorance of the uninformed.' He sees the work of the Seminar, therefore, as spelling `liberty for . . . millions.' " This sounds to me like an application of John 8:32: "And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." [NKJV] But Prof. Johnson continues: "From the start, then, we see that the agenda of the Seminar is not disinterested scholarship, but a social mission against the way in which the church controls the Bible . . . ." Note that "television evangelists" have somehow become transformed into "the way in which the church controls the Bible." That Funk hoped the work of the Seminar may help expose fraudulent televangelists (and there is ample evidence that SOME televangelists are fraudulent) does not prove that he or any other Seminar member has his or her own axe to grind. (Neither, of course, does it prove the total absence of axes).

Prof. Johnson makes liberal use of `loaded' words such as `salacious,' or `infamous.' Chapter 2 begins: "For all its notoriety, the Jesus Seminar . . . ." Without actually saying it, Johnson seems to be trying to give one the impression that the Seminar belongs in a class with the yellowest of yellow journalism. He rather strongly suggests that their motives are more commercial and/or egotistical than religious; that they are more interested in money than truth. This is what is called `hostile mind-reading,' and like most hostile mind-readers, he does not present any credentials in mind-reading, or any other evidence of his implicitly claimed ability to read minds other than his own.

Prof. Johnson's confused attack on Bishop John Shelby Spong (and incidentally, on Michael Goulder) is longer on vitriol but than on scholarship. In discussing Spong's book  Resurrection : Myth or Reality?  Johnson writes: "Bishop Spong is not the first person to overuse a legitimate insight already abused by a well-known scholar (in this case Michael Goulder). In any case, for Spong, everything in the New Testament has now become midrash." Johnson's slight against Michael Goulder is completely unsupported, and the assertion following it is simply not true. Spong explicitly recognized that certain passages in the New Testament (not "everything in the New Testament") bear some similarity to a technique called `midrash.' And this is not in the book Johnson was supposedly discussing, but in  Liberating the Gospels: Reading the Bible with Jewish Eyes , which Johnson fails to mention, thus demonstrating a surprising lack of scholarship in his attack on Spong's. First cast out the beam out of thine own eye, Prof. Johnson.

It is perfectly legitimate for a particular discipline to coin a special meaning of a word, e.g. `demand' in economics, but that does not give economists the authority to deny the general public the right to use that word in its ordinary English sense. But that is precisely what Prof. Johnson attempts in chapter 4 with respect to `history' and `historical.' Prof. Johnson writes: "The term `history' CANNOT be used simply for `the past' or `what happened in the past,' any more than `historical' can be used as a synonym for `what was real about the past.' History is, rather, the product of human intelligence and IMAGINATION." [emphasis added] (p. 81). But "the record of past events and times" and "having once existed or lived in the real world, as opposed to being part of legend or fiction or as distinguished from religious belief" are precisely what those words mean in everyday English usage, according to dictionary.reference.com. Nevertheless, Prof. Johnson has the arrogance to deny our right to use them in their normal meaning. A "product of human intelligence and imagination" is not history, albeit it may be "alternate history" such as Kathleen McGowan's Magdalene Line trilogy ( The Expected One: A Novel (Magdalene Line) , The Book of Love: A Novel (The Magdalene Line) , The Poet Prince: A Novel (Magdalene Line)  or Eric Flint's  1632 (The Assiti Shards) .

On p. 82, "Our SELECTION and NAMING of something as an `event' is itself constitutive [constituent; making a thing what it is; essential: dictionary.reference.com] of the `event.' " [Italics in original] It would never have occurred to me to claim that by mentioning, say, the discovery of penicillin, I have made myself or my action an essential part of an event that happened about six years before I was born. Really?? I would, of course, be proud of my contribution to it if I had made one, but I didn't.

One final criticism: on page 175: "I have repeatedly challenged the premise that any historical reconstruction CAN, by itself, function as normative. [emphasis added] The premise is technically correct. Of course it CAN so function; the real question is whether it SHOULD. I think Prof. Johnson and I are actually pretty much in agreement that there are very few, if any instances in which it should, and that in nearly every instance when it does so function, it shouldn't. If anything can be misused, someone will probably misuse it.

I might not have been able to offer as many criticisms if Prof. Johnson had included footnotes citing supporting material, but at least he didn't burden readers with notes at the end, imposing on us the nuisance of keeping two places and constantly flipping back and forth. And lest you wonder how I could give this book as much as 3 stars, let me cite some of the instances where Prof. Johnson was quite right, and in one case surprisingly so:

He makes the excellent point that "Historical knowing is like a sieve that catches big chunks but lets much fine stuff slip through." (p. 82)

He is also correct that the many hypothetical reconstructions suggested by members of the Jesus Seminar and others are still historical speculation, educated guesses, and no matter how well supported by evidence, can not reasonably be taken as proven historical fact. (But, as Prof. Johnson correctly points out, neither can the various gospels, canonical or otherwise.)

It is not until the last chapter, 6, that Johnson makes his most telling point: "The `real Jesus' for Christian faith is the resurrected Jesus . . . Christians have always taken the resurrection to be the defining event concerning Jesus, and the fundamental perspective from which to perceive `the real Jesus.' " Thus the questions which the Jesus Seminar has attempted and is attempting to answer are, from this perspective, irrelevant. Ok, so why bother to write this book, if none of it matters? Why not let the Seminar publish their estimates of what Jesus said and did for those of us who are interested in such, and let those to whom it doesn't matter not read those publications? (Prof. Johnson tells why on p. 146. To me at least, his reason seems less than persuasive.) The claim that Jesus was resurrected is not at this time subject to historical proof or disproof, and presumably will not be unless and until the resurrected Jesus actually makes an appearance in which he demonstrates his genuineness beyond any reasonable doubt. Even if that does happen, I am sure many professed Christians, the comfortable ones who have been following Jesus where Jesus never led, will declare him a fraud because he will again do what got him crucified two millennia ago, comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. In any case, Prof. Johnson here establishes the main point of the book, that Christian faith need not be vulnerable to attempts to find the historical Jesus via critical examination of the existing evidence, because the historical Jesus is not the basis of Christian faith.

And finally, one of the most perceptive highlights of the book: on page 63, Prof. Johnson writes: "A more complex pattern of avoidance can be found among those professors of New Testament in conservative seminaries who have managed to combine `critical scholarship' with the demands of traditional authority. A careful reading of their publications reveals that the scholarship is `critical' in form much more than in substance: the paraphernalia of the academy are used--often with considerable cleverness--to support conclusions already determined by doctrine." One wonders whether Prof. Johnson realizes quite how apropos that observation is with respect to this book.

watziznayme@gmail.com

Read less

11 people found this helpful

Report

B. Marold

5.0 out of 5 stars Well stated polemic on misuses of History on Faith

Reviewed in the United States on 27 November 2007

Verified Purchase

`The Real Jesus' by leading Biblical scholar, Luke Timothy Johnson is not another biography of the ancient religious leader, Jesus of Galilee. The subtitle, `The Misguided Quest for the Historical Jesus and the Truth of the Traditional Gospels' tells the fuller story that this is a critique of many (but not all) attempts to nail down the flesh and blood founder and savior for the world's Christians.

For what it's worth, as a liberal Lutheran, I agree with all of Professor Johnson's main points, assuming he has accurately portrayed the positions of his opponents, and I have no reason to believe he has not. And, my agreement is based less on religious doctrines, than on philosophical principals which were old before the dawn of this millennium, but constantly forgotten by scholars who should know better.

Professor Johnson's primary target is a scholarly consortium of several dozen mid-level university teachers calling itself the `Jesus Seminar', plus writers with allied agendas such as John Spong, A. N. Wilson, Stephen Mitchell, Marcus Borg, John Dominic Crossen and Burton Mack. I say `mid-level' because one of Professor Johnson's less important points is that none of these seminar participants are from the leading Theological schools in the country such as Harvard, Yale, Union (NYC), and Chicago. And, compared to the membership of the country-wide Society of Biblical Literature, their membership is relatively small.

Johnson's argument has two general parts. The first part is the evidence that the `Jesus Seminar', author of the book `The Five Gospels, The Search for the Authentic Words of Jesus', adapts several questionable assumptions and agendas before beginning their research. Another criticism of the `Jesus Seminar' is their methodology. In a nutshell, the primary technique is for each member of the Seminar to vote on each statement about or by Jesus, and offer the opinion that the statement is historically likely, unlikely, or indeterminate. Aside from being an unsound scholarly procedure, it has the effect of attracting a lot of media attention to the Seminar's deliberations. And, some pronouncements by the Seminar leaders suggest this attention is actually one of Seminar's objectives.

The second line of argument is much simpler, stronger, and entirely capable of trivializing the work of Johnson's targets. The argument is based on the Seminar premise that a study of the historical Jesus will clarify and improve our Faith. This assumption is simply wrong. The Christian faith based on the resurrection of Christ after his embodying the law, resulting in execution, and creating a new covenant with those who believe has simply nothing to do with whether Jesus argued with a Pharisee named Simon, cured three or thirty epileptics, rode on a donkey or a mule, wore a red or a white robe, and had Joseph of Galilee as his biological father. Of course, Christian statements of faith do include some statements about historical events, but whether those statements are historically true is about as relevant to Christian faith as Lincoln's log cabin childhood and Washington's tree chopping choices are to the lore of American history. On a deeper level, critiquing Jesus statements about Jewish law and using that critique as a determinant of Christian faith makes about as much sense as criticizing Shakespeare's `Henry V' for not giving an accurate transcript of the king's speech before the battle of Agincourt.

To be sure, Professor Johnson presents these arguments in far greater detail and with a much better handle on the proper use of scripture than I can. My primary intention is to line up with Professor Johnson (and many leading scholars) in discrediting this misguided enterprise.

It is important to point out that neither Professor Johnson nor I am devaluing Bible scholarship at several different levels, especially at the level of the accuracy of documents, the meaning of the words, and the historical contexts in which the documents were written. One has a far better understanding, for example, of Luke's concern with the poor of the day when one realizes that virtually everyone was poor, and the government was carried out by a patronage system which today would be equated with graft, extortion, and corruption. Even more important is to realize that Professor Johnson is one of the leading practitioners of this kind of research, having done superior works of exegesis on the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts.

I do have two minor criticisms of the book. While I agree with all Johnson's major points, I have to point out that it is a polemic specifically against a class of writers and a trend in scholarship which may be traced back to the Tubingen school of 19th century Germany. This does not mean all Bible scholarship has the same weaknesses. It does not even mean all works on a historical Jesus are equally tainted with theological misdirection. Johnson barely mentions one of the most famous works on this subject, the 1906 `Quest for the Historical Jesus' by Albert Schweitzer (Schweitzer is generally critical of the Tubingen school, especially in his works on Paul). He also makes no mention of important books by leading Biblical historian, E. P. Sanders. His work on the `historical Jesus' has none of the blemishes of those authors Johnson attacks.

As a Lutheran, I also have to chuckle a bit at Catholic Johnson's suggesting that it was Martin Luther who opened the Pandora's Box of critical Bible scholarship. I believe the open discussion of and free access to scriptures is far superior to holding them hostage to interpretation by a few. And, as stated above, Johnson is just as much a practitioner of Luther's tradition as are many other of his scholarly Catholic and Protestant colleagues.

If you find yourself entranced by the siren's song of the `Jesus Seminar' writings, plus similar writings by John Spong, A. N. Wilson, Stephen Mitchell, Marcus Borg, John Dominic Crossen and Burton Mack, I strongly suggest you read this book to get an important perspective on their assumptions, methods, and conclusions.

Read less

16 people found this helpful

Report

Mr. J. Hastings

5.0 out of 5 stars A Breath of Fresh Air

Reviewed in the United Kingdom on 18 August 2015

Verified Purchase

After reading a number of books examining the Historical Jesus which find very little inspiring in him or propose a variety of incompatible reconstructions of his life, this book comes as a breath of fresh air.

Luke Johnson begins by critiquing the “Jesus Seminar” and a number of other authors of works on the so-called ‘Historical Jesus’ for their unsound methodology and consequent faulty conclusions. He continues by pointing out that the available historical evidence about Jesus (essentially the New Testament) is very limited. Nevertheless, he lists seventeen points about Jesus made by the New Testament letters (eight of which are supported by non-Christian writers). He adds that “Even the most critical historian can confidently assert that a Jew named Jesus worked as a teacher and wonder-worker in Palestine during the reign of Tiberius, was executed by crucifixion under the prefect Pontius Pilate, and continued to have followers after his death.” (p 123)

Johnson also points out that, even though Christianity has always claimed Jesus to be a historical figure, Christian faith has always been based on religious claims about Jesus; specifically, that God raised him from the dead and that he shares his new life with believers through the Holy Spirit. Since historical methodology describes events in the past in naturalistic terms, the supernaturalistic claims of Christianity, particularly the resurrection, are by definition not historical. These claims cannot be proved historically; they can be validated only by the witness of authentic Christian discipleship; in lives demonstrating a pattern of faithful obedience and loving service. (p 168)

The author also draws attention to the question of whether the methods of historical criticism taught in universities bear any relation to the needs of student ministers who need to be learning about such matters as preaching, visiting the sick and comforting the grieving. In this he echoes (perhaps unknowingly) the words of C S Lewis to a group of trainee ministers in “Fern Seed and Elephants” (1959, published in, inter alia, “Christian Reflections”, 1998). Johnson says that the effect of the methods he critiques “…is that the New Testament writings – as writings – were neglected” (p 104). C S Lewis said, “These men ask me to believe they can read between the lines of the old texts; the evidence is their obvious inability to read … the lines themselves.” (op cit p 199)

Read more

4 people found this helpful

Report

A. D. Neal

2.0 out of 5 stars Read Living Jesus, not the "Real" Jesus

Reviewed in the United States on 21 March 2006

Verified Purchase

Imagine my absolute and utter sadness when I picked up this book and found myself reading the equivelent of academic trashtalk. I do not agree with many 'findings' of the Jesus seminar, and generally agree with the methodological problems pointed out by Johnson. However, I disagree outright with his basic thesis that the Seminar represents an outright attack on 'true' Christianity. The first 60 pages are extremely polemical, and leave a bad taste in the mouth; sadly, they could have been summed up in less than six pages, except that polemic sells.

The main problem with this book is it is fundamentally hypocritical in its basic function. Most everything that Johnson points out is wrong with the attitudes of the Seminar (especially the seeking of 'limelight' and advertising itself) is reflected directly in Johnson's own writings and career. If anyone is in the position to make claims against self propagandizing, it is not he.

Again, I agree in theory with much of what Johnson says, but his overly reactionary attitude is outright dismissive and brings no truly contemplative thesis to bear. This book is completely de-constructive (which, in defense of Johnson, is his purpose outlined in his preface), but worse is that it borders on character assassination rather than skillful scholarly discourse. I also felt outright insulted by the dismissive attitude of the author, as it seemed like he was saying that I, the reader, have no ability to make up my own mind on these matters and he was going to "school" me, so to speak. This belittling style offends me and almost made me not want to read any of his other books.

If you are interested in this book, look instead at "Living Jesus" the counterpart to this work, also by Johnson, that does not directly attack the Jesus Seminar but rather gives a constructive view into Johnson's own methodological approach. By establishing his own constructive approach, you, the reader, are better able to make up your own mind about the Jesus seminar, rather than being told what to think.

Please don't be won over by hard-nosed polemic, there can be no true discussion if points are made simply by being the most outspoken and one-sided.

Read less

62 people found this helpful

Report

Dr. P. M. Johnson

4.0 out of 5 stars Excellent, but written in the language of a seminarian

Reviewed in the United States on 2 February 2010

Verified Purchase

This is an excellent rebuttal to the numerous misguided attempts to uncover the "Real Jesus." I use the term "misguided" as this is what the author has chosen to describe the newest forms of heresy which are no more true to Christianity than was Marcionism, gnosticism, or any of the other "isms" which have blighted the West since practically the minute after Jesus' resurrection.

The book is well written and clear, but unless one is accustomed to the language of the seminary it takes a little bit of plowing through it to become comfortable with the terminology. Having a dictionary at hand for the first few days of reading is not a bad idea. But this is well worth it as Mr. Johnson is well suited to counter the media-hyped nonsense of so many "enlightened" theologians who are leading people badly astray. One can only benefit from reading this book - time well spent.

3 people found this helpful

Report

===

Profile Image for Skylar Burris.

Skylar Burris

Author 

20 books

238 followers

Follow

December 16, 2008

The primary point Luke Timothy Johnson seems to be making in this book is that the "real Jesus" is not the "historical Jesus" at all – for the "historical Jesus" is impossible to reliably reconstruct and has influenced absolutely no one living today. The "real Jesus" is, rather, the living Jesus, Jesus as actually experienced and understood by those whose lives and communities His presence transforms. The author makes a convincing argument against the Jesus Seminar, highlighting its spurious methods of scholarship. While he skewers the Seminar's methods, he also questions its motives: "Is what is claimed to be a pursuit of the historical Jesus not in truth a kind of flight from the image of Jesus and of discipleship inexorably ingrained" in the New Testament? "Instead of an effort to rectify the distorting effect of the Gospel narratives, the effort to reconstruct Jesus according to some other pattern" than the Gospels "appears increasingly as an attempt to flee the" countercultural "scandal of the Gospel."

The gospels are an interpretation of Jesus's historical life, but it is those gospels that, through interpretation, reveal the "real Jesus." The living Jesus, Jesus as understood by those who experienced transformed lives and transformed communities, and who wrote the New Testament, IS the "real Jesus." This is so simplistic, and yet I have to confess that I have quite overlooked this simple concept whenever I am caught up in discussions with people over this or that minor biblical inconsistency, or this or that historical likelihood. How easily Christians allow themselves to be caught up in this "historical proof" of Christ mindset, forgetting, sometimes, that if Christ is truly living, as we Christians claim Him to be, then He cannot be "really" known as a figure in history, anymore than I can be fully understood as a person on the basis of only my first fifteen years of life.

History, the author argues, is a limited mode of knowing, and historical analysis cannot reveal all truth. It is pointless to chop up the gospels into little pieces in an attempt to reconstruct historical truth, because the gospels are written as literary units and are only useful if approached with respect for their literary integrity as interpretive works. Alternative historical theories of who Jesus "really" was are simply not what the earliest Christians (based on the oldest available Christian writings) perceived him to be. Ultimately, any Christian's claim to experience the real Jesus "can be challenged" on moral or religious grounds, "but not historically"—because historical knowledge cannot get at experience (which is necessarily interpretive). The author is not touting some anti-intellectual line; far from it; rather, he is simply insisting that there are limits to historical and material modes of knowing.

This about sums it up: "The claims of the gospel cannot be demonstrated logically. They cannot be proved historically. They can be validated only existentially by the witness of the authentic Christian discipleship." And this authentic discipleship--rather than constantly striving to prove the improvable to skeptical minds—ought to be the Christian's focus. "The more the church has sought to ground itself in something other than the transforming work of the Spirit, the more it has sought to buttress its claims by philosophy or history, the more it has sought to defend itself against its cultured despisers by means of sophisticated apology, the more also it has missed the point of its existence, which is not to take a place within worldly wisdom but to bear witness to the reality of a God who transforms suffering and death with the power of new life."

This was a book that enabled me to think about and appreciate things I already believe from a different and, at the moment at least, more satisfying angle. I recommend the book to any Christian who questions or has ever questioned the value of the gospels for revealing the "real Jesus." The book has its flaws, and it is not precisely quick or poetic reading, but I gave it five stars because it is rare for me to find a book these days that I really feel does something for me both intellectually and spiritually—and this did.

christianity

Like

Comment

Profile Image for Adam Ross.

Adam Ross

750 reviews

95 followers

Follow

January 10, 2016

I read this book in a single day. One might say I devoured it. Johnson is a New Testament scholar in the Roman Catholic tradition, and he is a well-respected one as well. In this book, he takes on the Jesus Seminar for being insufficiently historical and much too confident in their claims about discovering the "historical Jesus."

Principally the book is about the limits of historical research, a matter handled ably by Johnson. The thing about Johnson that is so confounding is that he opposes fundamentalists as well as the progressive Jesus Seminar for completely missing the point of religion. Ultimately, he says, the historical Jesus is lost to us. There are a couple of vague references by Roman and Jewish sources, but the rest come from the post-resurrection documents that make up the New Testament. It is impossible to "get behind" these texts to the real Jesus and any historian claiming with certainty to have unlocked this mystery is a huckster and probably selling a book. His critique in this vein is completely devastating to the Jesus Seminar claims. The central claim of Christianity, he says, is that Jesus is a person in the present, living somehow right now in and around us by way of the Spirit, a claim which is simply beyond the ability of historical research to make any claims about. This is a mystery and beyond human explanation, accessible only by mystical inward experience. He is also not a fundamentalist, carefully distinguishing resurrection (what happened to Jesus) from resuscitation (a dead body returning to human life), and goes to some lengths to show how the New Testament actually treads very lightly on the matter of Jesus's human body, because the point of resurrection is that Jesus is translated and elevated to God and becomes something beyond human comprehension or explanation.

In short, it is a good book worthy of attention. I think he is too hard at times on scholars like Borg, Crossan, and Spong. As Johnson shows, their historical reconstructions of Jesus are spurious, but having read some of their work I find theologically they are not actually very far from Johnson's own views in certain respects.

history

 

theology

Like

Comment

Profile Image for Aaron Carlberg.

Aaron Carlberg

409 reviews

26 followers

Follow

Read

February 15, 2020

There have been a lot of books that have come out lately dealing with all these ideas about what the REAL JESUS was like, what he did, did he even exist, etc. This is a good book to read to get another historical perspective that can reinforce the historical validity of Jesus.

We must remember that opposite to many religious traditions, Christianity is meant and understood to be a uniquely historical faith. It is founded in real world events that take place in historical context. When some people try to equate it with mythological worldviews they forget that in the actual pages of the biblical books, it dates itself to real world events. When the scriptures use the word "faith" it does not mean a nebulous mustering up of heartfelt emotion about a given belief, the word faith actually meant TRUST.

The body of evidence surrounding Jesus, the early church, and its spread in the world is cause for "faith" in God's promised reconciliation with man.

Show more

Like

Comment

Profile Image for Daniel.

Daniel

72 reviews

Follow

July 10, 2016

An excellent book from Luke Johnson, professor New Testament at Emory University. In this short work, Johnson does an excellent job of explaining how misguided understandings of history, contemporary culture, and poor scholarship has guided the "search for the historical Jesus". He also has an excellent chapter on the limitations of historical study - bringing a solid understanding of what historical study can and cannot do to our understanding of what the limited collection of documents in the New Testament can and cannot tell us. Finally, he provides a much needed call for Christian intellectuals to acknowledge and embrace that the "real Jesus" is the Jesus that did live and die in Palestine in the early 1st century, but is also the Jesus that is still alive and moving in His Church. This perspective is transformative in understanding Jesus. An excellent and well worthwhile read! A bit of a slow read, due to the academic nature, but very well done.

christianity

2 likes

Like

Comment

Profile Image for Gary.

Gary

121 reviews

8 followers

Follow

February 23, 2015

Revelatory analysis of where the Historical Jesus studies of the Jesus Seminar goes wrong; the Gospels and the New Testament writings were never about history (in the sense of what really happened) or story the facts about Jesus. They were written to convey an experience of a living presence felt by a community of people. Cutting up the Gospels and letters that make up the New Testament to try to determine which really happened not only strips them of all meaning, but putting the "real" parts back together becomes a process that says more about the editors beliefs and biases than about anything historic. Recommended for any who have found the Jesus Seminar books interesting but ultimately unsatisfying.

2 likes

Like

Comment

Tim Soper

14 reviews

Follow

January 26, 2017

I enjoyed "The Real Jesus" but unless you are an active observer of the debate over the Jesus Seminar from 20 years ago, I suspect that this book might bore you. Additionally, even though it is a relatively short book at 178 pages, it is not a light or easy read. Based on this being a couple decade old debate and the scholarly quality of writing, I suspect the layman to run out of steam mid-book. The unfortunate consequence of bailing early is that the final chapter reads at breakneck pace and the words rush from the page with the passion of the author. I'm glad my research into the Gospels forced me to stick with this, but know that you'll have to be just as committed to gain the payoff at the end.

christian-scholarship

Like

Comment

Profile Image for Brent Wilson.

Brent Wilson

199 reviews

9 followers

Follow

August 7, 2009

A needed rebuttal/response to the Jesus Seminar. Quickly dated however, since the Jesus Seminar has died out. Johnson's anti-historical Jesus stance is difficult to sustain. I prefer a traditional scholar like N T Wright, who connects the best historical Jesus scholarship to our current demands on faith and church.

religion

Like

Comment

Profile Image for Greg.

Greg

600 reviews

39 followers

Follow

January 26, 2020

A few years ago I was privileged to have taken Luke Timothy Johnson's wonderful lecture series for The Teaching Company on the Gospels. It was because I found that course so fascinating, and its teacher so thoroughly informed, that I recently ordered this somewhat battered used book.

It is a relatively brief book -- about 180 pages --but it requires attentive reading, not because its writing is dense or the arguments bewildering, but because Johnson is a writer who chooses his words carefully and avoids an excess of them (unlike yours truly).

Written in the mid-90s, it is, first of all, a critical reaction to theologians and biblical scholars who, like those participating in the Jesus Seminar, are constantly seeking to tease the "historical Jesus" from the mists of the past.

In the first few chapters, Johnson discusses several of these kinds of books and arguments, showing how, in his opinion, all attempts to do so must wrestle with their own kinds of distortions and questionable assumptions.

While I found this part interesting, I especially enjoyed his chapters on "The Limitations of History" and "The Real Jesus and the Gospels."

In the Limitation of History Johnson's words apply to ALL who attempt historical work, and not just to those who dedicate themselves to biblical inquiry. It is VERY difficult to accurately portray "what happened," even in our modern times when we are likely to have multiple sources of information, much of it recorded. And even when we get the "sequence of events" right, and perhaps identity the person or persons responsible, discovering WHY they did what they did, let alone the true MEANING or INTENTION, is not only very difficult, but it is nearly impossible to do so with accuracy. The reason is that these matters require INTERPRETATION, and that -- notwithstanding the excellence of research or the attempted neutrality of the reporter/observer -- inevitably involves some degree of subjectivity.

Anyhow, this chapter is worth the price of the book alone, for it is a good caveat to all who believe that this or that matter is "settled" beyond a doubt.

He then shows how the most objective and impassive historian has an even much more difficult time with past events, as witnesses may be few and their perspective or interpretation of what happened or what they observed perhaps tainted (and the further back in time we go, the less we can be sure that we are aware of the kinds of biases that might be operative then).

In summary, the things we can KNOW about Jesus with any degree of historical certainty are, in fact, very few, indeed: he did exist, he was born somewhere between 8 and 3 BCE, he had a public ministry of healing and teaching from 1 to 3 years, he was baptized by John, he was a charismatic and divisive individual, and he died a criminal's death through crucifixion.

But there is something else, too, Johnson argues (I think persuasively): we can know something ABOUT who Jesus was by the consistency in which he is portrayed in the Gospels, in Paul's letters, and in some of the (very few) notations about him from secular sources: he was deeply compassionate, a highly educated Jew, and one who taught that we must love each other as we are loved by God.

Almost everything else is either unknowable or is influence by, or dependent upon, one's faith (or lack of it).

For thoughtful people with questions about "who" Jesus was, I believe this book would be highly interesting, perhaps even helpful.

1 like

Like

Comment

Profile Image for Michael Havens.

Michael Havens

57 reviews

3 followers

Follow

May 21, 2009

Luke Timothy Johnson, former Benedictine monk and priest, and now Biblical scholar, takes on a critical analysis of the assumptions and scholarship of the Jesus Seminar.

Who or what is the Jesus Seminar? If you are not familiar with them or the media frenzy their research elicited surprise by many and serious questions and disdain by many within the Biblical scholarship world. The sad fact was, as Professor Johnson points out in this book, that the media not only did not make critical questions as to their claims, such as the majority of scholars in Biblical Studies were in agreement with their findings (see the whole of "The Good News and the Nightly News” for claims by Jesus seminar head, Robert Funk and his connections with the media), such as; looking at the number of Jesus Seminar members as opposed to the total number of scholars worldwide, making this claim more than dubious); the “beaded rating system” in which scholars “voted” through a system of colored beads, what sayings of Christ in the Synoptic Gospels are authentic and which are not. Here is how the system works:

red: That’s Jesus!

pink: Sure sounds like Jesus.

gray: Well, maybe.

Black: There’s been some mistake.

(The Real Jesus, 5)

and ignoring the synoptic gospels in favor of non canonical writings

Much of Professor Johnson’s argument lies here, namely, that the scholars of the Jesus Seminar attempt to trump the Synoptic Gospels in favor of Gnostic gospels in order to weight the balance of their argument and supporting it not with the main text of their objection (the New Testament) as well as using, as seen above, methodology which becomes a self fulfilling argument, never dealing with the New Testament directly, effectively placing the argument ahead of significant evidence, like the proverbial cart before the horse.

Johnson also argues that the Gospels need to be treated as the main or center text, because it is the text that is the heart of Christian belief. Any criticism has to be delivered on the basis of internal evidence. The bias slant that the Jesus Seminar presents is not one of healthy and vigorous debate, one which Professor Johnson believes is important, but is a slant in which the cards are stacked against any claims by the New Testament on the basis that a “historical” Jesus would be devoid of any of the cultural, religious, or social underpinnings that were in existence via 33 C.E. Such a position allows those involved in the Historical Jesus movement to claim that they are really rescuing Jesus from “the Church” and bringing the Church to a healthier appraisal of their faith, one that leaves the “historical” Jesus with no real spiritual referent and no religious connections, in a sense, ignoring Israel’s real religious presence.

Johnson presents a totally opposite perspective. He reasons that all the trappings of scripture, with all the thorny parts be looked at seriously, because it reflects attitudes and a social viewpoint that is unique to ancient Israel. He also argues that the Gnostics, while helpful in a limited way, could not be used as texts par excellence, in the way the Seminar would like to utilize, to the fact that much of the Gnostic Gospels are not only contradicting Jewish tradition and perspective (one of the things many people, even Christians fail to recognize is that Jesus was a Jew) as well as Christian views on the nature of man, but more importantly, the reasons for the Gnostics not included was because many of those texts are fragmentations, sayings (37-39, see also 149-158 for Johnson’s critique of the comparisons between the Gnostics and the Synoptics, in particular, how the Gnostics treat Jesus theologically, what critical things are left out of the Gnostics, and how the Synoptics relate to each other as a whole).

Professor Johnson begins the first half of his position with an impressive Preface/Thesis and builds on his argument, making point by point, the errors found in the Jesus Seminar’s findings and methodology (Chapters ,2,and 3). Chapters 4, 5, and 6 make up his answer to the problem of not only the problematical issues dealing with the findings of the Jesus Seminar, but gives the reasoning from recognized historical methodology in the treatment of the Gospels, ending with his position of how one can find the historical Jesus within the confines of the Synoptic Gospels as well as the rest of Scripture.

Professor Johnson’s scholarship and argument is concise and to the point. It is a small book of only 177 pages, but it would be worth reading it in increments of a chapter a day to really think about what he is presenting. While individuals who like Apologetics would enjoy this work, it ‘s focus is not theological apologia, but rather a defense of biblical scholarship and methodology as opposed to hype and media overselling.

===

Higher Critical Review

Luke Timothy Johnson.  The Real Jesus: The Misguided Quest for the Historical Jesus and the Truth of the Traditional Gospels.

San Francisco: HarperCollins 1996. vii + 182 pp. $12.00 (pbk)

Reviewed by Robert M. Price. Institute for Higher Critical Studies

JHC 4/1 (Spring, 1997), 156-158. 

https://depts.drew.edu/jhc/rpltj.html

This book sometimes sounds like it is trying to debunk the research of the Jesus Seminar and to substitute a different set of more conservative and more balanced critical conclusions. The "real Jesus" of the title would then seem to be a "more realistic" Jesus, one based on a methodologically superior historical study. But this turns out not to be the thrust of Johnson's treatise after all. His criticisms of radical New Testament critics like Burton Mack and the Jesus Seminar (of which I am proud to be a Fellow and in whose deliberations I am privileged to have participated) are finally beside the point.

Johnson gives an altogether false impression that the Seminar uses some far-fetched and idiosyncratic methodology that respectable scholars would not deign to touch with a ten-foot pole. (Incredibly, he actually supplies a list of elite divinity schools whose highly paid professors are the only ones he considers legitimate scholars!) The fact of the matter is that most of the Fellows of the Jesus Seminar are far less skeptical, less methodologically rigorous, than Rudolf Bultmann and the critics of the previous generation. Their methods and assumptions differ little from those Johnson and his allies use. Nor are the results attained by the Jesus Seminar anything particularly new, as anyone familiar with the last few decades' of biblical scholarship will be aware. The only thing new about the Jesus Seminar is that it has made a point of going public with the commonplaces of professional biblical scholarship.

Traditionally, ministers learn at least a smattering of biblical criticism in seminary, but they are careful to keep mum about it in the pulpit lest they arouse the ire of the pious. One suspects that the Jesus Seminar's decision to go public (caricatured by Johnson and his allies as crass publicity-hunger) has put people like Johnson in an uncomfortable position. Those to whom he and his colleagues are accountable never quite understood what was going on in the scholarly guild, and now that the Jesus Seminar has blabbed it, Johnson, Richard Hays, Raymond Brown, and a number of others suddenly find themselves in the role of Peter, denying their former comrades as many times as they can before the cock crows.

Ironically, despite Johnson's tirades against New Testament critics who treat the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles as fiction, his own lasting contribution to scholarship, his published dissertation The Literary Function of Possessions in Luke-Acts (Scholars Press, 1977), is a brilliant piece of the very sort of literary analysis he fulminates against in The Real Jesus. If he can make the kind of sense he does of the author's intention in Luke and Acts, then Luke and Acts are fiction, not history.

All Johnson's subsequent work has been what James Barr calls "maximal conservatism." In his The Writings of the New Testament, for instance, he argues for the authentic Pauline authorship of the Pastoral Epistles (I and 2 Timothy and Titus), an anachronistic dinosaur of a view rendered pretty much incredible ever since Schleiermacher in the last century. It is clear that he now longs for the pre-critical paradise of traditional beliefs about biblical authorship and accuracy. What happened to change Johnson's scholarly judgment from radical to conservative? Nothing really. And here is where we discover how his criticism of the supposedly unsound methods of modem biblical criticism is just a blind, a smoke screen. Eventually Johnson admits that historical research cannot yield a definite portrait of the historical Jesus. That way lies agnosticism.

But then, as so often happens with religious writers, agnosticism magically transforms itself into fideism, a leap of faith. Instead of trying to build a plausible, historical Jesus construct out of elusive and shadowy evidence, says Johnson, we ought to be satisfied with the Christ of faith, the Son of God character of the Gospels and of Roman Catholic dogma. This is what he means by "the real Jesus" � the one the institutional Church thinks its owns the copyright on.

In short, Johnson has no better theory of the historical Jesus to offer than that of Burton Mack or Robert Funk or John Dominic Crossan. No, he wants something else entirely, the traditional stained-glass savior of Christian dogma. It is for him finally a matter of historic faith, not of historical fact. Of course he feels sure the facts, could they be recovered, would fit the theological Christ, the "real Jesus." But how does he know this? By faith!

And this admission sheds some light on all those neo-conservative traditionalist positions Johnson takes in this book and in his other recent publications. It would seem that he has opted, as a matter of theology, for the traditional, "authorized" version of Christian origins, and so he allows himself in every case to be escorted to amenable conclusions, not by the data but by simple consistency with his traditionalist preferences. It is not so much a matter of scholarly opinion as it is company policy. He has abandoned the task of historical scholarship to serve as an ecclesiastical spin doctor. He has an institution and a party line to defend. Let him defend it. But let us be careful not to confuse the result with historical inquiry.

===

Pageboy: A Memoir - Page, Elliot |

Pageboy: A Memoir - Page, Elliot | 9781250878359 | Amazon.com.au | Books


Kindle
$16.99Read with Our Free App
Audiobook
$14.95
Hardcover
$28.41
19 New from $28.41
Paperback
$22.00
13 New from $22.00
Audio CD
$41.37
6 New from $41.37
=====

#1 NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER

"Eloquent and enthralling..." --Washington Post

"The emergence of our true selves is all of our life's work. Pageboy helps chart the course." --Jamie Lee Curtis

"Searing, deeply moving, and incredibly poignant... This isn't simply a book on what it means to be trans, it's about what it means to be human." --Alok Vaid-Menon

NAMED A MOST ANTICIPATED BOOK by Salon, The Week, Elle, Bustle, and more.

Full of intimate stories, from chasing down secret love affairs to battling body image and struggling with familial strife, Pageboy is a love letter to the power of being seen. With this evocative and lyrical debut, Oscar-nominated star Elliot Page captures the universal human experience of searching for ourselves and our place in this complicated world.

"Can I kiss you?" It was two months before the world premiere of Juno, and Elliot Page was in his first ever queer bar. The hot summer air hung heavy around him as he looked at her. And then it happened. In front of everyone. A previously unfathomable experience. Here he was on the precipice of discovering himself as a queer person, as a trans person. Getting closer to his desires, his dreams, himself, without the repression he'd carried for so long. But for Elliot, two steps forward had always come with one step back.

With Juno's massive success, Elliot became one of the world's most beloved actors. His dreams were coming true, but the pressure to perform suffocated him. He was forced to play the part of the glossy young starlet, a role that made his skin crawl, on and off set. The career that had been an escape out of his reality and into a world of imagination was suddenly a nightmare.

As he navigated criticism and abuse from some of the most powerful people in Hollywood, a past that snapped at his heels, and a society dead set on forcing him into a binary, Elliot often stayed silent, unsure of what to do. Until enough was enough.

The Oscar-nominated star who captivated the world with his performance in Juno finally shares his story in a groundbreaking and inspiring memoir about love, family, fame -- and stepping into who we truly are with strength, joy and connection.
====

Length  288
2023
What are popular highlights?


There are an infinite number of ways to be queer and trans, and my story speaks to only one.
Highlighted by 238 Kindle readers

Why do we lose that ability? To create a whole world? A bunk bed was a kingdom, I was a boy.
Highlighted by 228 Kindle readers

Two steps forward, one step back. I’ve spent much of my life chipping away toward the truth, while terrified to cause a collapse.
Highlighted by 127 Kindle readers
==============
Product description

Review


"Eloquent and enthralling....[Pageboy] is an intense, emotional read, delivered in image-drenched prose. "'Let me just exist with you, ' he writes, 'happier than ever.' Reading those words nearly made me cry. Page's plea is small. It also feels very big."
--Washington Post

"Powerful"
--New York Times Book Review

"Raw, harrowing and often heartbreaking to read... Page's book arrives, as if on cue, in a moment when the trans community is facing even more danger than when he started writing it just over a year ago."
--LA Times

"Pageboy is like listening to a friend... It's impossible to miss the truth in his words: 'I wouldn't be typing this right now if it weren't for you and your care.' ... Now is an excellent time to read this humanizing and well-written memoir."
--Associated Press

"The emergence of our true selves is all of our life's work. Pageboy helps chart the course."
--Jamie Lee Curtis

"Searing, deeply moving, and incredibly poignant... This isn't simply a book on what it means to be trans, it's about what it means to be human."
=====

Top review from Australia


Chad
5.0 out of 5 stars Absolutely brilliantReviewed in Australia on 6 June 2023
Verified Purchase
Elliot Page’s memoir is a beautiful but at times heartbreaking story of their journey of self discovery and becoming their authentic self.

It reads like a conversation with a friend. It’s real, candid, raw, genuine and doesn’t pretend to be anything it’s not. In doing so, it makes Pageboy some a terrific moving read.

Whether Elliot intended to or not he’s written a book, that without a doubt, he, including myself and many other queer people could have done with growing up.



HelpfulReport

See more reviews


Top reviews from other countries

H. Williams
4.0 out of 5 stars Interesting to read but maybe a little hollow as a memoirReviewed in the United States on 19 September 2023
Verified Purchase

It’s interesting when young-ish people write memoirs. This is one of those memoirs in which I liked the ideas and appreciated what Elliot had to say, but I wish he’d have waited a few years so there was a little more depth to it.

One the one hand, we think of Hollywood as a bastion of liberalism, but Elliot talks about the homophobia that drives much of the deal-making in Tinsel Town. We also see the lovely well-put-together stars in movies and doing press junkets, but he also reveals the messy lives that many stars hide when not on the red carpet.

He also highlights the projects that never quite take off and his search for novelty that many actors pursue in new movies, new roles, and new relationships.

This is not an autobiography, it’s a memoir, so it’s not linear, and it bounces between periods and events. This makes it the memoir interesting but I lost track of a few of the people who appear once for a specific event, those who appear again later to make a point, and those who (surprisingly) never re-appear.

I responded to his statement that “It shocked me that I had asked for what I needed.” I think that lots of us good gay boys are used to accepting less than we should, less than optimal situations, rather than explaining what we need to thrive.

I also found “Pageboy” to be humorless and even dour. I think a little humor could have made this memoir more approachable and give Elliot a wider range of character.

(On a personal note, while discussing this book with others, it was difficult to keep from misgendering Elliot since I still often think of him as a woman in “Juno” and other films. Elliot wrote this book.)
Read less

One person found this helpfulReport

darrenphillipsuk
5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent bookReviewed in the United Kingdom on 18 September 2023
Verified Purchase

I have been very pro Trans for some time. This autobiography is an eye opener on the struggles of both Hollywood and gender disphoria. An excellent read.
Report

Timothy
5.0 out of 5 stars My Heart AchesReviewed in the United States on 6 August 2023
Verified Purchase

My Heart Aches for Elliott and other trans people like him in these immediate times. I couldn’t help but fall for him by the time I got to the end of his book. But if I were him I would be worried every time I leave my house, constantly looking over my shoulder and never letting my guard down. If I were him I would likely purchase and carry a concealed weapon for protection. Trans people are being killed every day as well as hated to the extreme thanks to political creeps who have to have someone to hate. The gays have become too powerful to go after so the haters have now chosen trans people. The book was a terrific read Not chronological so I found my self going back and rereading some sections just to keep names and relationships straight. But Elliot’s life so far has been far from ‘chronological’ so I can see why he wrote his book that way. The relationship with his father is tragic especially since the father ends up siding with some anti-trans writers. That current relationship seems to remain a mystery. I found myself watching some of Elliot’s recent interviews about the book as reading it sparked my curiosity. Overall a fascinating read and I wish him the best as I await his next book.

2 people found this helpfulReport

J K
5.0 out of 5 stars Honest and well-writtenReviewed in the United Kingdom on 5 August 2023
Verified Purchase

Not so fussed as others about the random chronology as the writing is searingly honest, highly introspective, and boasts some very well-turned phrases. Elliott could take up writing as a second career if he decided to sideline acting. Let's hope his acting never hits the back-burner though, he's always a welcome and highly luminous screen presence. One can only hope such fearless, soul-searching honesty regarding the whole issue of gender dysphoria (and troubled upbringing) helps to inspire more understanding and tolerance of the trans community. This is the 21st century after all, and Elliott was a fully-fledged adult in his 30s on making the choice to transition, not some confused, impressionable teenager. Give him a break, he's finally happy after years in the wildnerness. Just be glad for him and others like him who finally come to feel liberated and at home in their own bodies and lives. It's long-overdue.

5 people found this helpfulReport

Braden Pickering
4.0 out of 5 stars A brave, if somewhat disjointed, taleReviewed in the United States on 12 June 2023
Verified Purchase

Although not terribly familiar with his work onscreen, I’ve been somewhat intrigued by Elliot Page as a personality and thought I would give his new memoir a go. I also admit, despite being a gay man myself, I am more than a little ignorant of the struggles facing our transgendered friends and thought it might be a way to entertain as well as educate myself.

While enlightening on both fronts to one degree or another, I do have a few notes. First, the book is not entirely chronological, which isn’t necessarily a problem in and of itself, but the constant jumping around through time and moving from place to place quickly becomes confusing and loses a bit of the ability to see the growth afforded by the journey. A lot of his friends, would-be lovers and acquaintances are referred to by first name only, and more than once I found myself skimming back to check if it was someone who had already been referred to that I missed, someone so famous they only need go by one name a la Madonna, or perhaps simply a pseudonym for someone whose identity he was trying to protect. And finally, the general tone is one of…not quite haughtiness, exactly, but he tends to go off on these abstract metaphors and wordy non-sequiturs that straddle the thin line between sloppy writer and genuine intellectual.

Not that any of this is to say Page is unlikeable, but it seemed like he was still playing some of this close to the chest. We learn a great deal about his family and get a few stories from his film sets, most of which are tied into the greater pressures of gender conformity, but while these are obviously serious topics I do wish he told his story with a bit more humor or lightheartedness sprinkled in. Or maybe that’s just me. Still, while not a super “fun” read it’s a very brave and important one and I appreciate him sharing. Unfortunately the people who need to hear this most probably never will, but it’s good to know another voice has joined the fray. You are seen.
Read less

76 people found this helpfulReport

Elliot Page - Wikipedia

Elliot Page - Wikipedia

Elliot Page

71 languages

• Article
• Talk

• Read
• View source
• View history

Tools

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Elliot Page
Page at the 2023 National Book Festival
Born	February 21, 1987 (age 36) Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
Occupations	Actor film producer
Years active	1997–present
Spouse	Emma Portner ​ ​ (m. 2018; div. 2021)​
Awards	Full list

Elliot Page^[1] (formerly Ellen Page; born February 21, 1987)^[2] is a Canadian actor. He^[a] has received various accolades, including nominations for an Academy Award, two BAFTA Awards and a Primetime Emmy Award. Page was assigned female at birth, and later publicly came out as a trans man in December 2020. In March 2021, he became the first openly trans man to appear on the cover of Time.^[4]

While presenting as female, Page came to recognition for his role in the television franchise Pit Pony (1997–2000), for which he was nominated for a Young Artist Award, and for his recurring roles in Trailer Park Boys (2002) and ReGenesis (2004). He received critical acclaim for portraying the title role, a pregnant teenager, in Jason Reitman's film Juno (2007), and earned nominations for an Academy Award, two BAFTA Awards, a Golden Globe Award and a Screen Actors Guild Award. At age 20, it made him the fourth-youngest nominee for the Academy Award Best Actress at the time.^[5][6]

Page's other notable films include Hard Candy (2005), Whip It (2009), Super (2010), Inception (2010), and Tallulah (2016). He also portrayed superhero Kitty Pryde in the X-Men films The Last Stand (2006) and Days of Future Past (2014). He produced and starred in the film Freeheld (2015) and directed There's Something in the Water (2019). He played the player character Jodie Holmes in the video game Beyond: Two Souls (2013), for which he received a BAFTA Games Award nomination. He hosted the Viceland documentary series Gaycation (2016–2017), earning two Primetime Emmy Awards nominations, and played Vanya/Viktor Hargreeves in the Netflix series The Umbrella Academy (2019–present).

Page is also known as an outspoken activist. Describing himself as a pro-choice feminist, he has spoken out in favor of the Me Too movement, advocated for abortion rights, has called for the end of military dictatorship in Myanmar, and also practices as a vegan. In 2014 Page was included in The Advocate's annual "40 Under 40" list. In 2015 he received the Human Rights Campaign Vanguard Award.^[7] Page has strongly spoken out against discriminatory legislation towards the trans community and has become a vocal advocate for LGBTQ rights.^[8]

Early life and education

Page was born on February 21, 1987, in Halifax, Nova Scotia, to Martha Philpotts, a teacher, and Dennis Page, a graphic designer.^[9] He was assigned female at birth and used the birth name of Ellen prior to transitioning.^[10] Page attended the Halifax Grammar School until grade 10, and spent some time at Queen Elizabeth High School.^[11][12] After graduating from the Shambhala School in 2005, Page spent two years in Toronto, studying in the Interact Program at Vaughan Road Academy, along with close friend and fellow Canadian actor Mark Rendall.^[11]

Career

1997–2007: Early roles and widespread recognition

Page first acted on camera in 1997 at the age of ten, starring as Maggie Maclean in the CBC Television movie Pit Pony,^[13] which later spun off into a television series of the same name that ran from 1999 to 2000.^[14] For the role, he was nominated for a Young Artist Award.^[15] In 2002, Page starred as Joanie in the film Marion Bridge, which is noted for being his first feature-film role.^[16] In the same year, he was cast in the television series Trailer Park Boys in the recurring role of Treena Lahey, which he played for five episodes.^[17] Page had roles in the films Touch & Go and Love That Boy in 2003,^[18] and he also starred in the television films Homeless to Harvard: The Liz Murray Story and Ghost Cat in the same year. For Ghost Cat, he won the Gemini Award for Best Performance in a Children's or Youth Program or Series.^[19] In 2004, Page starred in the drama Wilby Wonderful, for which he won an award at the Atlantic Film Festival and was nominated for a Genie Award. Also in 2004, he had a recurring role in season 1 of the series ReGenesis as Lilith Sandström, daughter of the show's protagonist.^[20]

Page at the Hollywood Life Awards in 2007

In 2005, Page received recognition for his role in the movie Hard Candy, where he portrayed Hayley Stark, a teenage girl who takes a pedophile hostage.^[21] The film was a critical and commercial success,^[22] and he received acclaim for his performance, with USA Today praising him for his role, stating that Page "manages to be both cruelly callous and likable" and gives "one of the most complex, disturbing and haunting performances of the year".^[23] For the role, he won the Austin Film Critics Association Award for Best Actress in 2006, among other awards and nominations.^[24] Also in 2005, he starred in the British film Mouth to Mouth. In 2006, Page appeared in X-Men: The Last Stand (2006) as Kitty Pryde, a girl who can walk through walls. In the previous X-Men movies, the part had been used in brief cameos played by other actors, but never as a main character.^[25] The film was a commercial success.^[26]

In 2007, he had his widespread breakthrough for his leading role as the title character, a pregnant teenager, in the coming-of-age comedy-drama film Juno. A critical and financial success,^[27] the film was widely considered to be one of the best of the 2000s, and Page's performance earned critical acclaim. Film critic A. O. Scott of The New York Times described him as "frighteningly talented ... who is able to seem, in the space of a single scene, mature beyond ... years and disarmingly childlike",^[28] and Roger Ebert said that no other actor had a better performance in 2007 than Page, whose "presence and timing are extraordinary".^[29] For his performance, Page was nominated for several awards, including an Academy Award for Best Actress, a BAFTA Award for Best Actress in a Leading Role, a Critics' Choice Award for Best Actress, a Golden Globe Award for Best Actress — Motion Picture Comedy or Musical, and a Screen Actors Guild Award for Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Leading Role.^[30][31][32] He also won a Canadian Comedy Award, an Independent Spirit Award, and a Satellite Award for the role, as well as numerous critics awards, including Detroit Film Critics Society, Austin Film Critics Association and Florida Film Critics Circle. Also in 2007, he appeared in The Stone Angel, and led the films An American Crime and The Tracey Fragments, the latter of which also earned him critical acclaim, with the Boston Herald writing that "It is also a further reminder that Page is the real thing. But we knew that already".^[33] He won the Vancouver Film Critics Circle Award for Best Actress in a Canadian Film,^[34] among other accolades.

2008–2014: Rise to prominence and established actor

In 2008, Page co-starred in the comedy-drama film Smart People, which premiered in January that year at the Sundance Film Festival, and received a mixed response from critics.^[35] In the film, he played the overachieving daughter of a college professor.^[36] On March 1, 2008, Page hosted Saturday Night Live.^[37] On May 3, 2009, he guest starred in "Waverly Hills 9-0-2-1-D'oh", an episode of The Simpsons, as the character Alaska Nebraska, a parody of Hannah Montana.^[38] In September 2009, he starred in Drew Barrymore's directorial debut, Whip It, as a member of a roller derby team.^[39] The film premiered at the 2009 Toronto International Film Festival and had its wide release on October 2, 2009.^[40]

Page at the Paris premiere for Inception, in July 2010

In August 2009, Page was cast in the big-budget Christopher Nolan science fiction film Inception, which began filming the same year.^[41] The film was released on July 16, 2010, and was a commercial success.^[42] It received widespread acclaim from critics, being hailed as one of the best films of the 2010s.^[43] Page played Ariadne, an architecture student who is a newcomer to dream espionage.^[44][45] The cast, including Page, earned several accolades, with Page earning nominations from the Saturn Awards and the MTV Awards. He also starred in the 2010 black comedy superhero film Super,^[46] which he accepted after seeing the script for the film.^[47] The film received mixed reviews, though Page was praised for his performance as a psychopathic teenage sidekick.^[48]

In January 2010, Page began appearing in a series of advertisements for Cisco Systems, including commercials set in Lunenburg, Nova Scotia.^[49][50] That April, the Michael Lander film Peacock featured Page as Maggie Bailey, a struggling young mother.^[51] Page noted the film as "one of the boldest screenplays I've come across in my albeit short career; it's a character and story I can throw myself into and exactly the type of movie I love to be a part of".^[52] In April 2011, it was announced that Page would co-star as Monica in the Woody Allen film To Rome with Love, a film told in four separate vignettes;^[53] the film was released in 2012.

In June 2012, Quantic Dream announced the video game Beyond: Two Souls, in which Page portrays one of the player characters, Jodie Holmes, through voice acting and motion-capture acting; it was released on October 8, 2013, in North America.^[54][55][56] The game polarized critics,^[57] but Page earned praise for his performance, with GamesTM calling it "truly breathtaking ... Jodie’s character is one we’ve seen before in many films – a troubled child with a gift, haunted by spirits, struggling with growing up", but Page excelled in giving "gravity and warmth" to the character.^[58] He was given various awards and nominations for the role, including the British Academy Games Award for Best Performer.^[59] In 2013, another video game, The Last of Us, was released. Page accused the production for using his likeness without permission for the character Ellie;^[60][61] the character's appearance was subsequently redesigned to better reflect the actual performer's personality and make the character younger.^[62]

In 2013, Page stated that his directorial debut would be Miss Stevens, and would star Anna Faris and be produced by Gary Gilbert, Jordan Horowitz and Doug Wald;^[63][64] the project eventually moved forward without Page, with scriptwriter Julia Hart replacing Page as the director.^[65] Also in 2013, he co-starred in Zal Batmanglij's thriller The East, a film inspired by the experiences and drawing on thrillers from the 1970s,^[66] and he also starred in Lynn Shelton's Touchy Feely. In 2014, Page reprised his role as Kitty Pryde in X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014).^[67][68][69] The film was a major box-office success,^[70] and received positive reviews from critics,^[71] being noted as one of the best films in the X-Men franchise. Page was praised for his performance and was nominated for the Teen Choice Award for Choice Movie Scene Stealer and the Kids' Choice Award for Female Action Star.^[72][73] In December 2014, Page portrayed Han Solo in a staged reading of Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back.^[74]

2015–present: Career fluctuations and other ventures

Page in 2015

In 2015, Page starred in and produced the film Freeheld, about Laurel Hester,^[75] which was adapted from the 2007 short film of the same name.^[76] The film received a mixed response from critics, with review site Rotten Tomatoes writing that "Freeheld certainly means well, but its cardboard characters and by-the-numbers drama undermine its noble intentions".^[77] In 2016, Page co-starred in the Netflix film Tallulah as the eponymous character;^[78] the film marked his third collaboration with director Sian Heder, and his second collaboration with Allison Janney, both of whom he worked with on Juno.^[79] In the film, his character is a young woman who abducts a baby and tries to pass it off as her own.^[78] On his acting,^[80] The Guardian wrote "...what grounds it are the terrific performances and Heder's rich direction and screenplay".^[80] In the same year, he appeared in the film Window Horses and provided the English voice of Rosy in the French film My Life as a Zucchini,^[81] the latter of which earned critical acclaim^[82][83] and a nomination for the Academy Award for Best Animated Feature.^[84]

On November 9, 2017, it was announced that Page had been cast in the main role of Vanya/Viktor Hargreeves in the Netflix superhero series The Umbrella Academy.^[85][86] The show received positive reviews from critics,^[87] and Page was acclaimed for his performance, earning a Saturn Award nomination in 2019.^[88][89] After Page came out as transgender, it was revealed that he would continue his role in the show, with Netflix updating Page's name across the service.^[90] In March 2022, it was announced that Page's character would return in the upcoming third season and transition to male;^[91][92] the character briefly comes out to his siblings during "World's Biggest Ball of Twine".^[93] Gizmodo reported that the change "was very likely done to reflect Page's own transition".^[92]

He headlined the science-fiction film Flatliners,^[94] a remake of the 1990 film of the same name which was released in 2017, emerging as a commercial success.^[95] Flatliners was panned by critics,^[96][97] although Page and the ensemble cast were praised, with film critic Matt Zoller Seitz writing that "Luna and Page in particular make much stronger impressions than you might expect, given the repetitious and mostly shallow scenarios they're asked to enact ... But the choppy, cliched visuals and the script's superficial approach to the characters' predicaments ultimately undo any goodwill that the actors can generate."^[98] Also in 2017, he produced and starred in the film The Cured.^[99]

In 2019, Page starred in the Netflix miniseries Tales of the City as Shawna Hopkins,^[100][101] which received positive reviews.^[102][103] Page, along with Ian Daniel, directed and produced the documentary There's Something in the Water, which is about environmental racism;^[104] the film premiered at the 2019 Toronto International Film Festival,^[105] and was later released on Netflix on March 27, 2020.^[106] The film received positive reviews from critics, with The Hollywood Reporter writing that the film, while "made in a standard documentary format that includes a voiceover and a tad too much weepy music", "gets its job done directly enough, underlining a situation that remains dire despite what seems to be a growing level awareness around the country".^[107] Page will next have a voice role in the upcoming film Naya Legend of the Golden Dolphin and Robodog.^[108]

In August 2021, Page collaborated with Mark Rendall for a music release on Bandcamp.^[109] The three-track EP has been described as a "lo-fi bedroom pop adventure" in the press.^[110] In August 2021, he signed an overall deal with Universal Content Productions.^[111] In September 2021, Page launched a production company, Page Boy Productions, and appointed Matt Jordan Smith to serve as Head of Development and Production.^[112] In February 2022, it was announced that Flatiron Books had acquired the publishing rights to Pageboy, a memoir written by Page, for $3 million, with the book set to release in June 2023.^[113] The memoir debuted at the top of The New York Times Best Sellers List for Nonfiction.^[114]

In October 2022, Page Boy Productions announced the project Backspot with him acting as executive producer.^[115] Filming in Toronto on the production wrapped in March 2023.^[116] In June 2023, it was reported that he served as a producer, screenwriter and actor on the upcoming drama film Close to You, which had just wrapped filming.^[117] Both films premiered at the 2023 Toronto International Film Festival.^[118][119]

Upcoming projects

In June 2022, Page revealed that he was writing a screenplay with his Mouth to Mouth co-star Beatrice Brown.^[120]

Personal life

Activism

On abortion rights, in 2008, Page described himself as a pro-choice feminist.^[121] He was one of 30 celebrities who participated in a 2008 online advertisement series for US Campaign for Burma, calling for an end to the military dictatorship in Myanmar.^[122] Page practices a vegan lifestyle, and PETA named him and Jared Leto the Sexiest Vegetarians of 2014.^[123] He is an atheist, having remarked that religion "has always been used for beautiful things, and also as a way to justify discrimination".^[124]

On February 14, 2014, Page, who at that time presented as female, came out as gay (Page being attracted to women),^[125][126] during a speech at the Human Rights Campaign's "Time to Thrive" conference in Las Vegas.^{[127][128][129]} In November 2017, Page claimed to have been outed at age 18 by filmmaker Brett Ratner while on the set of X-Men: The Last Stand.^[130] This was corroborated by co-star Anna Paquin, who said that she was present when Ratner made the comment. In a lengthy Facebook post, Page expressed gratitude towards people who spoke out against abuse, and expressed frustration at the pattern of those who continued to remain silent on such matters.^[131] In 2014, Page was included in The Advocate's annual "40 Under 40" list.^[132][133]

Relationships

In 2017, Page and dancer/choreographer Emma Portner publicly revealed that they were in a relationship.^[134] They had met after Page noticed Portner on Instagram.^[135] In January 2018, Page announced that they were married.^[136] They separated in mid-2020, and Page filed for divorce in January 2021;^[137] it was finalized in early 2021.^[125]

Gender transition

Page's 2021 appearance on Time was the first for an openly trans man.^[138]

On December 1, 2020, Page came out as a trans man on his social media accounts, specified his pronouns as he and they, and revealed his new name, Elliot.^{[3][125][139]} Page explained that his decision to speak openly about his gender identity was partially prompted by the COVID-19 pandemic, and partially by the anti-transgender rhetoric in politics and the news cycle.^[140] GLAAD spokesperson Nick Adams stated that Page "will now be an inspiration to countless trans and non-binary people".^[141] Page's then-wife, Emma Portner, expressed support for him coming out that same day on her Instagram account, saying she was "so proud" of Page.^[142] Netflix tweeted: "So proud of our superhero! We love you Elliot!"^[143] Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and several celebrities, such as Ellen DeGeneres, Miley Cyrus, James Gunn, and Kumail Nanjiani, expressed support for Page after the announcement.^{[144][145][146]} That same day, Netflix announced that it would update Page's credits and metadata across all titles to reflect his name.^[146] These changes were completed by December 8, 2020.^[147]

Page appeared on the cover of the March 29 / April 5, 2021 issue of Time, making him the first openly trans man to do so.^[138] He requested that Wynne Neilly photograph him for the cover because he wanted another transgender person to be the photographer.^[148] In the featured article, he described himself as queer and non-binary,^[138][149] and revealed that at the time he came out, he had been recovering from undergoing top surgery, a process that he described as "life-saving".^[150] Page also revealed that at the age of nine, "I felt like a boy ... I wanted to be a boy. I would ask my mom if I could be someday."^[125]

Filmography

Film

Year	Title	Role	Notes
2002	The Wet Season	Jocelyn	Short film
	Marion Bridge	Joanie
2003	Touch & Go	Trish
	Love That Boy	Suzanna
2004	Wilby Wonderful	Emily Anderson
2005	Hard Candy	Hayley Stark
	Mouth to Mouth	Sherry
2006	X-Men: The Last Stand	Kitty Pryde
2007	An American Crime	Sylvia Likens
	Juno	Juno MacGuff
	The Tracey Fragments	Tracey Berkowitz
	The Stone Angel	Arlene Simmons
2008	Smart People	Vanessa Wetherhold
2009	Vanishing of the Bees	Narrator	Documentary
	Whip It	Bliss Cavendar / Babe Ruthless
2010	Peacock	Maggie Bailey
	Inception	Ariadne
	Super	Libby / Boltie
2012	To Rome with Love	Monica
2013	The East	Izzy
	Touchy Feely	Jenny
2014	X-Men: Days of Future Past	Kitty Pryde
	Tiny Detectives	Detective Ellen	Short film
2015	Into the Forest	Nell	Also producer
	Freeheld	Stacie Andree	Also producer
2016	Tallulah	Tallulah
	Window Horses	Kelly (voice)
	My Life as a Zucchini	Rosy (voice)	English dub
2017	My Days of Mercy	Lucy Moro	Also producer
	The Cured	Abbie	Also producer
	Flatliners	Courtney Holmes
2019	There's Something in the Water	Himself	Documentary; also director[151][152]
2022	Into My Name	—	Documentary; executive producer[153]
2023	Backspot	—	Executive producer[115]
	Close to You	Sam	Also co-writer and co-producer[117]

Television

Year	Title	Role	Notes
1997	Pit Pony	Maggie Maclean	Television film
1999–2000	Pit Pony		Main role
2002	Trailer Park Boys	Treena Lahey	5 episodes
	Rideau Hall	Helene	Episode: "Pilot"
2003	Homeless to Harvard: The Liz Murray Story	Young Lisa	Television film
	Going For Broke	Jennifer Bancroft	Television film
	Ghost Cat	Natalie Merritt	Television film
2004	I Downloaded a Ghost	Stella Blackstone	Television film
	ReGenesis	Lilith Sandström	8 episodes
2008	Saturday Night Live	Himself (host)	Episode: "Ellen Page/Wilco"
2009	The Simpsons	Alaska Nebraska (voice)	Episode: "Waverly Hills, 9-0-2-1-D'oh"
2011	Glenn Martin, DDS	Robot Assistant (voice)	Episode: "Date with Destiny"
	Tilda	Carolyn	Pilot
2012	Family Guy	Lindsey (voice)	Episode: "Tom Tucker: The Man and His Dream"
2013	Out There	Amber (voice)	Episode: "Ace's Wild"
2016–2017	Gaycation	Himself (host)	Documentary series on Viceland; also executive producer
2019–present	The Umbrella Academy	Vanya Hargreeves / Viktor Hargreeves	Main role
2019	Tales of the City	Shawna Hawkins	Main role
2023	Ark: The Animated Series	Victoria Walker (voice)	Main role

Video games

Year	Title	Role	Notes
2013	Beyond: Two Souls	Jodie Holmes	Also motion capture

Accolades

Main article: List of awards and nominations received by Elliot Page

For his performance in Juno (2007), Page received several awards and nominations in Best Breakthrough Performance and Best Actress categories, winning three Teen Choice Awards, a Canadian Comedy Award and a Satellite Award, as well as nominations for two British Academy Film Awards (BAFTAs), an Academy Award (Oscar) and a Golden Globe Award. His roles in the drama films The Tracey Fragments (2007) and Freeheld (2015), the sci-fi film Inception (2010), and the superhero works X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014) and The Umbrella Academy (2019–) earned him numerous accolades.

Page hosted the television documentary series Gaycation (2016) alongside Ian Daniel, which earned him two Primetime Emmy Award nominations. He additionally served as a voice and motion capture actor in the video game Beyond: Two Souls in 2013, garnering five award nominations, including a nomination for a British Academy Games Award for Performer in 2014.

See also

• List of actors with Academy Award nominations
• List of Canadian Academy Award winners and nominees
• List of Canadian actors
• List of LGBTQ Academy Award winners and nominees
• List of oldest and youngest Academy Award winners and nominees – Youngest nominees for Best Actress in a Leading Role
• List of transgender film and television directors

Notes

1. ^ Page uses the pronouns he/him and they/them.^[3] This article uses he/him for consistency.

References

1. ^ "Canadian actor Elliot Page shares he is transgender". CBC News. Archived from the original on December 1, 2020. Retrieved December 1, 2020.
2. ^ "Ellen Page: Film Actress (1987–)". Biography.com. A&E Networks. Archived from the original on April 3, 2015.
3. ^ Jump up to:^a b Page, Elliot [@theelliotpage] (December 1, 2020). "Hi friends..." (Tweet). Archived from the original on December 1, 2020. Retrieved December 1, 2020 – via Twitter.
4. ^ "'Juno' actor Elliot Page becomes first out trans man to star on Time magazine cover". CTV News. March 16, 2021. Archived from the original on March 16, 2021. Retrieved March 16, 2021.
5. ^ Renfro, Kim. "The 31 youngest Oscar nominees of all time". Insider. Archived from the original on June 23, 2021. Retrieved April 17, 2021.
6. ^ Evry, Max. "The 25 Youngest Oscar Nominees of All Time". MTV News. Archived from the original on April 20, 2021. Retrieved April 17, 2021.
7. ^ "Elliot Page Receives the HRC Vanguard Award 2015". Human Rights Campaign. Retrieved August 1, 2023.
8. ^ "Elliot Page: 'Children Will Die' Due to Anti-Trans Laws". Advocate. Retrieved August 1, 2023.
9. ^ Maher, Kevin (October 27, 2007). "Ellen Page isn't fazed by her scripts". The Times. ISSN 0140-0460. Archived from the original on December 1, 2020. Retrieved December 19, 2020.
10. ^ "Elliot Page of 'Umbrella Academy', 'Juno' fame announces he's transgender". Geo News. December 1, 2020. Archived from the original on December 1, 2020. Retrieved November 23, 2022.
11. ^ Jump up to:^a b Lisk, Dean (December 20, 2007). "Page making a scene on screen". The Daily News. Retrieved January 16, 2008.^{[permanent dead link]}
12. ^ "Profile: Ellen Page – Entertainment Celebrity Gossip". MSN Entertainment UK. Archived from the original on March 24, 2012.
13. ^ "How Tall Is Ellen Page?". ScreenRant. September 17, 2020. Archived from the original on December 1, 2020. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
14. ^ Anderson, Sam (October 1, 2015). "Ellen Page Goes Off-Script (Published 2015)". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on November 8, 2020. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
15. ^ "23rd Annual Young Artist Awards". April 23, 2016. Archived from the original on April 23, 2016.
16. ^ "MARION BRIDGE". October 22, 2006. Archived from the original on October 22, 2006.
17. ^ "10 Things That Make No Sense About Trailer Park Boys". ScreenRant. August 20, 2019. Archived from the original on September 13, 2019. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
18. ^ Eisner, Ken (March 19, 2003). "Touch & Go". Variety. Archived from the original on April 2, 2019. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
19. ^ "Nova Scotia-made Programs Win Gemini Awards". Government of Nova Scotia. May 11, 2018. Archived from the original on January 6, 2020. Retrieved March 25, 2021.
20. ^ "Your Chance To Catch The Show About Diseases That Pleases". io9. September 21, 2008. Archived from the original on October 25, 2020. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
21. ^ Dargis, Manohla (April 14, 2006). "In 'Hard Candy,' an Internet Lolita Is Not as Innocent as She Looks". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on February 12, 2018. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
22. ^ "Hard Candy". Box Office Mojo. IMDb. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
23. ^ Puig, Claudia (December 22, 2006). "Ellen: Manipulates Hard Candy to great effect". USA Today. Mclean, Virginia. Archived from the original on September 26, 2013. Retrieved July 12, 2018.
24. ^ Austin Film Critics Association (January 5, 2007). "Cinema's Labyrinth". Austin Chronicle. Texas. Archived from the original on August 26, 2017. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
25. ^ Gray, Richard J. II; Kaklamanidou, Betty (May 26, 2011). The 21st Century Superhero: Essays on Gender, Genre and Globalization in Film. Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company. ISBN 978-0-7864-8730-1. Archived from the original on December 1, 2020. Retrieved October 17, 2020.
26. ^ "X-Men: The Last Stand". Box Office Mojo. IMDb. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
27. ^ "Juno Crosses the $100 Million Mark, Becomes 'Too Cool'". The New York Observer. April 4, 2008. Archived from the original on April 4, 2008.
28. ^ Scott, A.O. (December 5, 2007). "Seeking Mr. and Mrs. Right for a Baby on the Way". The New York Times. New York City. Archived from the original on September 28, 2013. Retrieved July 12, 2018.
29. ^ Ebert, Roger (December 14, 2007). "Juno". Chicago Sun-Times. Archived from the original on February 20, 2013.
30. ^ "Nominees: 80th Annual Academy Awards: Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences". May 1, 2008. Archived from the original on May 1, 2008.
31. ^ "HFPA". December 15, 2007. Archived from the original on December 15, 2007.
32. ^ Crombie, Jenna (January 16, 2008). "Keira Knightley's Atonement Leads BAFTA Nominations". People. Archived from the original on March 3, 2017. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
33. ^ "'Fragments' takes Page out of 'Juno'". Boston Herald. June 27, 2008. Archived from the original on October 29, 2019. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
34. ^ "» Vancouver Film Critics Circle Awards – 2008 – Alternative Film Guide". May 9, 2008. Archived from the original on May 9, 2008.
35. ^ Morgenstern, Joe (April 12, 2008). "'Smart People' Gives Brainy Tale A Dose of Heart". The Wall Street Journal. ISSN 0099-9660. Archived from the original on September 25, 2020. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
36. ^ Muro, Noam (2008). Smart People (dvd). Miramax.
37. ^ Collins, Leah (February 12, 2008). "Ellen Page tapped for SNL, Walters special". Canada.com. Archived from the original on June 2, 2008 – via Entertainment Tonight Canada.
38. ^ Keveney, Bill (September 25, 2008). "'The Simpsons' hits a landmark". USA Today. Archived from the original on December 1, 2020. Retrieved September 25, 2008.
39. ^ Goldstein, Gregg; Kit, Borys (June 29, 2008). "Cast ready to roll on Whip It!". The Hollywood Reporter. Archived from the original on October 24, 2012. Retrieved April 19, 2009.
40. ^ Block, Sheri (September 13, 2009). "Barrymore whips up excitement for roller derby flick". CTV News. Archived from the original on April 18, 2021. Retrieved April 18, 2021.
41. ^ Fleming, Michael (April 1, 2009). "Trio in talks for 'Inception'". Variety. Archived from the original on April 9, 2009. Retrieved April 19, 2009.
42. ^ "Inception". Box Office Mojo. IMDb. Archived from the original on November 9, 2012.
43. ^ Dietz, Jason (December 9, 2010). "2010 Film Critic Top Ten Lists [Updated Jan. 6]". Metacritic. Archived from the original on January 4, 2018. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
44. ^ Morris, Daniel (January 28, 2023). "Film Talk: Looking Back – Sharing a dream with Inception". Shropshire Star. Retrieved March 25, 2023.
45. ^ Lennon, Christine (July 12, 2010). "Inception: Ellen Page interview". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved March 25, 2023.
46. ^ Kay, Jeremy (September 11, 2009). "Rainn Wilson, Ellen Page, Liv Tyler join Super for Ted Hope". Screendaily.com. Archived from the original on June 3, 2012. Retrieved November 30, 2010.
47. ^ "'Super' Trouper". Backstage.com. March 30, 2011. Archived from the original on August 11, 2019. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
48. ^ Weinberg, Scott (September 12, 2010). "Review: James Gunn's 'Super' (TIFF 2010)". Moviefone.com. Archived from the original on June 12, 2012.
49. ^ Graham, Mark (January 5, 2010). "Honest to Blog, Ellen Page Is Shilling for Cisco in a New TV Spot". Vulture. Archived from the original on February 12, 2013. Retrieved November 23, 2022.
50. ^ Dellosa, Joe (February 22, 2010). "Ellen Page in Cisco commercials doesn't make sense". The Independent Florida Alligator. Archived from the original on December 2, 2020. Retrieved November 23, 2022.
51. ^ Siegel, Tatiana (February 14, 2008). "Page, Murphy set for 'Peacock'". Variety. Archived from the original on February 5, 2013.
52. ^ "Ellen Page And Cillian Murphy Ready For Peacock!". Filmonic. November 20, 2012. Archived from the original on November 20, 2012.
53. ^ "Ellen Page, Jesse Eisenberg, Alec Baldwin join Woody Allen film". Hitflix. April 13, 2011. Archived from the original on June 9, 2012. Retrieved April 6, 2012.
54. ^ Tach, Dave (June 7, 2012). "'Beyond: Two Souls' impresses with its blend of narrative and technology". The Verge. Archived from the original on December 1, 2020. Retrieved June 9, 2012.
55. ^ Robinson, Martin (June 5, 2012). "Quantic Dream's Beyond confirmed, Ellen Page onboard". eurogamer.net. Archived from the original on May 22, 2013. Retrieved June 5, 2012.
56. ^ Osgood, Derek (March 1, 2013). "Willem Dafoe, Ellen Page Star in BEYOND: Two Souls October 8th". Playstation.com. Archived from the original on June 2, 2013. Retrieved June 25, 2013.
57. ^ "IGN AU Talks Beyond: Two Souls". IGN. October 11, 2013. Archived from the original on June 20, 2020. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
58. ^ "Beyond: Two Souls review | gamesTM – Official Website". October 23, 2018. Archived from the original on October 23, 2018. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
59. ^ "BAFTA: Games in 2014". British Academy of Film and Television Arts. March 12, 2014. Archived from the original on March 4, 2014. Retrieved December 7, 2020.
60. ^ June 24, 2013 (June 24, 2012). "Ellen Page accuses 'The Last of Us' developers of 'ripping off' her likeness". The Verge. Archived from the original on June 24, 2013. Retrieved February 2, 2023.
61. ^ Acuna, Kirsten (June 25, 2013). "Ellen Page Calls Out Video Game For Ripping Off Her Likeness". Business Insider. Archived from the original on January 17, 2023. Retrieved February 2, 2023.
62. ^ Welsh, Oli (June 8, 2012). "Changes to The Last of Us' Ellie and announcement of Ellen Page in Beyond are "complete coincidence"". Eurogamer. Gamer Network. Archived from the original on June 10, 2012. Retrieved June 28, 2020.
63. ^ Dickey, Josh L. (February 7, 2014). "Ellen Page set for directorial debut with 'Miss Stevens'". Variety. Archived from the original on December 1, 2020. Retrieved February 8, 2013.
64. ^ Fleming, Mike Jr. (February 7, 2013). "Ellen Page Making Directing Debut On 'Miss Stevens'; Anna Faris To Star". Deadline Hollywood. Los Angeles, California. Archived from the original on July 25, 2013. Retrieved July 21, 2013.
65. ^ Hipes, Patrick (June 24, 2015). "Lily Rabe To Star In Indie 'Miss Stevens'; Mark O'Brien Joins 'Story Of Your Life'; 'Frank The Bastard' Gets July Release". Deadline Hollywood. Los Angeles, California. Archived from the original on January 25, 2016. Retrieved January 26, 2016.
66. ^ Yamato, Jen (January 22, 2013). "[VIDEO] 'The East' – Freegan Summer Inspired Anarchist Thriller – Movieline". Movieline. Archived from the original on July 22, 2015. Retrieved July 20, 2015.
67. ^ "'X-Men: Days of Future Past' Cast: Ellen Page, Anna Paquin, Shawn Ashmore Added To Roster". HuffPost. January 26, 2013. Archived from the original on December 1, 2020. Retrieved January 26, 2013.
68. ^ Singer, Bryan (January 26, 2013). "Very excited to welcome #annapaquin, @ellenpage & @shawnrashmore to No. XMen #DaysofFuturePast". Archived from the original on September 22, 2013. Retrieved January 26, 2013.
69. ^ "Iceman, Kitty Pryde & Rogue Return For 'X-Men: Days of Future Past'". ScreenRant. January 27, 2013. Archived from the original on October 6, 2019. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
70. ^ Subers, Ray (May 25, 2014). "Weekend Report: 'X-Men' Rules Memorial Day, Falls Short of Franchise Record". Box Office Mojo. Archived from the original on August 17, 2020. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
71. ^ "Revenge of the Movie: 15 Sequels That Are Way Better Than the Originals". Playboy. July 26, 2016. Archived from the original on July 26, 2016.
72. ^ "Teen Choice Awards 2014 Nominees Revealed!". Yahoo!. June 17, 2014. Archived from the original on August 12, 2014. Retrieved November 8, 2020.
73. ^ Daley, Megan (February 20, 2015). "Meryl Streep gets her first Kids' Choice Awards nomination: See the full list". Entertainment Weekly. Archived from the original on November 5, 2020. Retrieved November 8, 2020.
74. ^ O'Neal, Sean (December 18, 2014). "Ellen Page is Han Solo, Jessica Alba is Princess Leia for Jason Reitman's live read". The A.V. Club. San Francisco, California: Onion, Inc. Archived from the original on December 1, 2020. Retrieved December 23, 2014.
75. ^ "Ellen Page To Play Lesbian". Archived from the original on February 10, 2009.
76. ^ "Ellen Page on 'Freeheld' and Coming Out". Time. Archived from the original on October 27, 2020. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
77. ^ "Freeheld (2015)". Rotten Tomatoes. October 2, 2015. Archived from the original on September 22, 2020. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
78. ^ Jump up to:^a b Sneider, Jeff (May 20, 2015). "'Juno's' Ellen Page, Allison Janney to Reteam for Dramatic Comedy 'Tallulah'". thewrap.com. Archived from the original on July 1, 2015. Retrieved June 30, 2015.
79. ^ "Ellen Page and Allison Janney to reunite (again) for Tallulah". News. May 21, 2015. Archived from the original on December 9, 2019. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
80. ^ Jump up to:^a b "Tallulah review – Ellen Page and Allison Janney make magic in baby drama". The Guardian. January 23, 2016. Archived from the original on October 21, 2020. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
81. ^ Giardina, Carolyn (December 21, 2016). "Will Forte, Ellen Page Join 'My Life as a Zucchini' English Language Voice Cast". The Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved June 18, 2023.
82. ^ "Animated film to represent Switzerland at Oscars". SWI swissinfo.ch. August 5, 2016. Archived from the original on June 7, 2021. Retrieved June 7, 2021.
83. ^ "2017 Golden Globes: full list of nominations". The Guardian. December 12, 2016. Archived from the original on May 13, 2021. Retrieved June 7, 2021.
84. ^ "Oscar Nominations: Complete List". Variety. January 24, 2017. Archived from the original on January 24, 2017. Retrieved June 7, 2021.
85. ^ Andreeva, Nellie (November 9, 2017). "'The Umbrella Academy': Ellen Page To Star In Netflix Series Based On Comic". Deadline Hollywood. Archived from the original on March 30, 2019. Retrieved February 9, 2019.
86. ^ Otterson, Joe (November 10, 2017). "Ellen Page Joins 'Umbrella Academy' Series at Netflix". Variety. Archived from the original on November 14, 2017. Retrieved June 7, 2021.
87. ^ "Review: 'Umbrella Academy' vs DC Universe's 'Doom Patrol': A battle of misfit shows". Los Angeles Times. February 15, 2019. Archived from the original on October 29, 2020. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
88. ^ Mancuso, Vinnie (July 16, 2019). "'Avengers: Endgame', 'Game of Thrones' Lead the 2019 Saturn Awards Nominations". Collider. Archived from the original on July 16, 2019. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
89. ^ "'The Umbrella Academy' Renewed For Season 2 By Netflix". Deadline Hollywood. April 2, 2019. Archived from the original on April 2, 2019. Retrieved April 3, 2019.
90. ^ Lang, Brent (December 1, 2020). "Elliot Page Will Continue to Star in 'Umbrella Academy,' Netflix Changes Credits on His Past Films". Variety. Archived from the original on December 2, 2020. Retrieved December 2, 2020.
91. ^ Maas, Jennifer (March 29, 2022). "Elliot Page's 'Umbrella Academy' Character to Come Out as Transgender in Season 3 as Viktor Hargreeves". Variety. Archived from the original on March 30, 2022. Retrieved March 30, 2022.
92. ^ Jump up to:^a b "Elliot Page Returns to Umbrella Academy as Viktor Hargreeves". Gizmodo. March 30, 2022. Archived from the original on March 31, 2022. Retrieved March 30, 2022.
93. ^ Sepinwall, Alan (June 23, 2022). "Here's How 'The Umbrella Academy' Handled Elliot Page's Transition -- and Why It Was the Right Call". Rolling Stone. Archived from the original on June 24, 2022. Retrieved June 24, 2022.
94. ^ McNary, Dave (June 13, 2017). "Ellen Page, Diego Luna, Nina Dobrev Experiment With Death in 'Flatliners' Trailer". Variety. Archived from the original on June 7, 2021. Retrieved June 7, 2021.
95. ^ D'Alessandro, Anthony (October 9, 2017). "'Blade Runner 2049' Still Rusted With $36M+ Columbus Day Weekend Opening: Monday Postmortem". Deadline. Archived from the original on October 9, 2017. Retrieved June 7, 2021.
96. ^ "Flatliners: Is the remake any good?". BBC News. October 2, 2017. Archived from the original on June 7, 2021. Retrieved June 7, 2021.
97. ^ Travers, Peter (September 29, 2017). "Travers: 'Flatliners' Thriller Remake Is a 'Fright-Free Fiasco'". Rolling Stone. Archived from the original on November 12, 2020. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
98. ^ Seitz, Matt Zoller (September 29, 2017). "Flatliners movie review & film summary (2017)". rogerebert.com. Archived from the original on June 7, 2021. Retrieved June 7, 2021.
99. ^ Miska, Brad (September 1, 2017). "New Look at Ellen Page Zombie Film 'The Cured'". Bloody Disgusting!. Archived from the original on March 15, 2018. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
100. ^ Gentile, Dan (December 3, 2020). "The Netflix 'Tales of the City' reboot shows the promise of pre-pandemic San Francisco". San Francisco Chronicle. Archived from the original on June 13, 2021. Retrieved June 7, 2021.
101. ^ Butler, Andrea (April 28, 2021). "The Elliot Page LGBTQ+ Miniseries You Can Find On Netflix". Looper.com. Archived from the original on June 7, 2021. Retrieved June 7, 2021.
102. ^ "Here Are All the Winners From the 2020 GLAAD Media Awards". Billboard. Archived from the original on April 9, 2021. Retrieved June 7, 2021.
103. ^ Ramos, Dino-Ray (April 6, 2020). "UTA Signs 'Tales Of The City' Star And Academy Award-Nominated Actor Ellen Page". Deadline Hollywood. Archived from the original on April 21, 2020. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
104. ^ "'Humbled' Ellen Page visits Alton Gas site, shows support for Indigenous water protectors". Toronto Star. April 16, 2019. Archived from the original on April 17, 2019. Retrieved April 22, 2019.
105. ^ "Nova Scotian stories of environmental racism hit the big screen at TIFF in Ellen Page documentary" Archived August 28, 2019, at the Wayback Machine. Toronto Star, July 31, 2019.
106. ^ "Ellen Page: "The more we filmed ... the more incredible women we met"". Halifax Examiner. February 20, 2020. Archived from the original on April 17, 2020. Retrieved February 21, 2020.
107. ^ Mintzer, Jordan (September 8, 2019). "'There's Something in the Water': Film Review". The Hollywood Reporter. Archived from the original on April 19, 2020. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
108. ^ Eckardt, Stephanie (April 28, 2021). "Elliot Page Tells Oprah He Finally Feels Comfortable Since Coming Out". W. Archived from the original on May 7, 2021. Retrieved May 7, 2021.
109. ^ "Mark and Elliot". Bandcamp. Archived from the original on August 29, 2021. Retrieved August 29, 2021.
110. ^ "Elliot Page just dropped his first album. It's a quirky 'lo-fi bedroom pop adventure'". LGBT Nation. August 28, 2021. Archived from the original on August 29, 2021. Retrieved August 29, 2021.
111. ^ Zorrilla, Mónica Marie (August 31, 2021). "Elliot Page Inks First-Look Deal With UCP". Variety. Archived from the original on September 1, 2021. Retrieved September 1, 2021.
112. ^ Petski, Denise (September 30, 2021). "Elliot Page Taps Matt Jordan Smith To Head Page Boy Productions". Deadline Hollywood. Archived from the original on March 1, 2022. Retrieved March 1, 2022.
113. ^ Fleming, Mike Jr. (February 18, 2022). "Elliot Page 'Pageboy' Memoir Deal Exceeds $3 Million". Deadline Hollywood. Archived from the original on February 18, 2022. Retrieved February 18, 2022.
114. ^ "Combined Print & E-Book Nonfiction: June 25, 2023". The New York Times. Retrieved June 25, 2023.
115. ^ Jump up to:^a b Vlessing, Etan (October 13, 2022). "Elliot Page to Executive Produce 'Backspot' Cheerleading Drama (Exclusive)". Hollywood Reporter. Archived from the original on March 14, 2023. Retrieved March 20, 2023.
116. ^ Ramachandran, Naman (March 20, 2023). "Evan Rachel Wood Joins Cast of 'Backspot,' Executive Produced by Elliot Page (EXCLUSIVE)". Variety. Archived from the original on March 20, 2023. Retrieved March 20, 2023.
117. ^ Jump up to:^a b Rubin, Rebecca (June 12, 2023). "Elliot Page to Star in Indie Drama 'Close to You'". Variety. Retrieved June 18, 2023.
118. ^ "Backspot". TIFF. Retrieved September 11, 2023.
119. ^ "Close To You". TIFF. Retrieved September 11, 2023.
120. ^ Mullen, Bill (June 1, 2022). "The Euphoria of Elliot Page". Esquire. Archived from the original on June 1, 2022. Retrieved June 1, 2022.
121. ^ Anderson, John (February 17, 2008). "'People always see a movie and project how you're going to be.'". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on December 1, 2020. Retrieved May 1, 2010.
122. ^ Williams, Alex (May 4, 2008). "Trying to Put a Name to the Face of Evil". The New York Times. Archived from the original on June 4, 2011. Retrieved May 1, 2010.
123. ^ Waxman, Olivia (June 26, 2014). "Jared Leto and Ellen Page Are PETA's Sexiest Vegetarian Celebrities". Time. Archived from the original on October 30, 2014. Retrieved November 30, 2014.
124. ^ D'Addario, Daniel (August 27, 2015). "Ellen Page on Freeheld and Why She Came Out: 'I Was Just Depressed'". Time. Archived from the original on September 14, 2015. Retrieved August 27, 2015.
125. ^ Jump up to:^a b c d Steinmetz, Katy (March 16, 2021). "Elliot Page Is Ready for This Moment". Time. Archived from the original on November 23, 2022. Retrieved November 23, 2022.
126. ^ Aviles, Gwen (September 12, 2019). "Ellen Page would be 'thrilled' to exclusively play queer roles". NBC News. Retrieved March 26, 2023. Actress and producer Ellen Page, who came out as a lesbian in 2014
127. ^ Abramovitch, Seth (February 14, 2014). "Ellen Page Comes Out As Gay: 'I Am Tired of Lying by Omission' (Exclusive)". The Hollywood Reporter. Archived from the original on February 15, 2014. Retrieved February 14, 2014.
128. ^ "Canadian actress Ellen Page comes out as gay: 'I'm tired of hiding'". CBC News. February 14, 2014. Archived from the original on December 1, 2020. Retrieved February 14, 2014.
129. ^ "Ellen Page Joins HRCF's Time to Thrive Conference". Human Rights Campaign. February 14, 2014. Archived from the original on December 1, 2020. Retrieved February 14, 2014.
130. ^ Levin, Sam (November 10, 2017). "Ellen Page says Brett Ratner outed her as gay in sexual remark when he was 18". The Guardian. Archived from the original on November 11, 2017. Retrieved November 10, 2017.
131. ^ "Ellen Page accuses Brett Ratner of sexual harassment". Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. November 20, 2017. Archived from the original on December 1, 2020. Retrieved November 11, 2017.
132. ^ "Ellen Page, This Generation's Gay A-Lister". The Advocate. August 20, 2014. Archived from the original on August 21, 2014. Retrieved August 20, 2014.
133. ^ Gilchrist, Tracy (August 20, 2014). "Ellen Page, This Generation's Gay A-Lister". The Advocate. Archived from the original on December 30, 2014. Retrieved December 29, 2014.
134. ^ Sippell, Margeaux (January 26, 2021). "They first took their relationship public in 2017". TheWrap. Retrieved March 26, 2023. They first took their relationship public in 2017.
135. ^ Bloom, Julie (February 12, 2018). "Ellen Page and Emma Portner, in Motion". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on December 2, 2020. Retrieved December 2, 2020.
136. ^ Miller, Mike (January 3, 2018). "Surprise! Ellen Page Is Married to Emma Portner". People. Archived from the original on January 3, 2018. Retrieved January 3, 2018.
137. ^ Bueno, Antoinette (January 26, 2021). "Elliot Page Files for Divorce From Wife Emma Portner". Entertainment Tonight. Archived from the original on January 26, 2021. Retrieved January 26, 2021.
138. ^ Jump up to:^a b c Holland, Oscar (March 17, 2021). "Elliot Page becomes first trans man to appear on Time magazine cover". CNN. Archived from the original on March 20, 2021. Retrieved June 13, 2021.
139. ^ Donnelly, Matt (December 1, 2020). "Oscar-Nominated Umbrella Academy Star Elliot Page Announces He Is Transgender". Variety. Archived from the original on December 1, 2020. Retrieved December 1, 2020.
140. ^ Dickson, E.J. (March 16, 2021). "Elliott Page Opens Up on Coming Out as Transgender in New Interview". Rolling Stone. Archived from the original on March 19, 2021. Retrieved April 9, 2021.
141. ^ "Elliot Page, Oscar-nominated star of Umbrella Academy, speaks out about being transgender". GLAAD. December 1, 2020. Archived from the original on December 1, 2020. Retrieved December 1, 2020.
142. ^ "Elliot Page's Wife Says She's 'So Proud' of Him for Coming Out as Transgender: 'Love You So Much'". People. December 1, 2020. Archived from the original on December 1, 2020. Retrieved December 1, 2020.
143. ^ "'Juno' Star Elliot Page, Formerly Known As Ellen Page, Comes Out As Transgender". NDTV. Archived from the original on December 2, 2020. Retrieved December 2, 2020.
144. ^ Silva, Cynthia (December 1, 2020). "'Brave,' 'beautiful': Celebs support 'Juno' star Elliot Page after he announces he's trans". NBC. Archived from the original on December 2, 2020. Retrieved November 23, 2022.
145. ^ "Elliot Page: Canadian actor announces he's transgender". Global News. December 1, 2020. Archived from the original on December 1, 2020. Retrieved December 2, 2020.
146. ^ Jump up to:^a b Lang, Brent; Donnelly, Matt (December 1, 2020). "Elliot Page Will Continue to Star in 'Umbrella Academy,' Netflix Changes Credits on His Past Films". Variety. Archived from the original on December 2, 2020. Retrieved December 26, 2021.
147. ^ "Netflix amends Elliot Page's name on all past credits". Special Broadcasting Service. December 8, 2020. Archived from the original on December 27, 2021. Retrieved December 26, 2021.
148. ^ Knegt, Peter (March 24, 2021). "When Elliot Page was ready for his closeup, he wanted photographer Wynne Neilly behind the lens". CBC News. Archived from the original on October 31, 2021. Retrieved June 3, 2021.
149. ^ Robey, Tim (December 2, 2021). "Elliot Page has been through enough – let the 'deadnaming' stop now". The Daily Telegraph. Archived from the original on January 10, 2022. Retrieved June 15, 2021.
150. ^ "Elliot Page on Oprah Winfrey: Transition surgery 'life-saving'". BBC News. April 30, 2021. Archived from the original on April 30, 2021. Retrieved May 1, 2021.
151. ^ Lang, Brent (August 8, 2019). "Toronto Film Festival Unveils Documentary, Midnight, Discovery Lineups". Archived from the original on August 9, 2019. Retrieved August 9, 2019.
152. ^ "There's Something in the Water". Toronto International Film Festival. Archived from the original on August 1, 2019. Retrieved August 9, 2019.
153. ^ "| Berlinale | Programme | Programme - Nel mio nome | Into My Name". Berlin International Film Festival. Archived from the original on March 31, 2022. Retrieved March 30, 2022.

Further reading

• Arbuthnot, Leaf (June 30, 2019), "A Life in the Day: the Juno and X-Men actress Ellen Page", The Sunday Times (subscription required)

External links

Elliot Pageat Wikipedia's sister projects

• Media from Commons
• Quotations from Wikiquote
• Data from Wikidata

• Elliot Page at IMDb