Korea' s Flower Village

50th Anniversary of ‘Kkotdongne’… Blooming ‘Flowers of Love’ in a Sanctuary for the Homeless

Started with a 1976 meeting with the late Choi Gwi-dong; grew into a welfare community embracing the homeless, the elderly, and the disabled; commemorative event to be held at Kkotdongne in Eumseong on the 8th.

The Kkotdongne Foundation (hereinafter "Kkotdongne"), which began with a meeting on September 12, 1976, between Father Oh Woong-jin (John the Apostle; Brothers of Kkotdongne of Jesus) and the late Choi Gwi-dong (birth name Gyeong-rak; Peter), is marking its 50th anniversary. Over the past five decades, Kkotdongne has stood as a friend to the poor and marginalized, dreaming of a world where "not a single person is cast aside." We share the story of the "miracle of love" created by humble hearts—tracing the journey of Kkotdongne from its inception to the present day—along with a message from its founder, Father Oh Woong-jin.

Marking its 50th anniversary this year, the Kkotdongne Foundation has cared for the poor since its establishment on September 12, 1976, striving to create a world where no one is abandoned. Pictured are founder Father Oh Woong-jin (right) and the late Choi Gwi-dong. Catholic Times archive photo

A Miracle That Began with 1,300 Won

After being ordained as a priest in May 1976, Father Oh was assigned to the Mugeuk Parish (now the Mugeuk Outstation of Geumwang Parish) in Eumseong, within the Diocese of Cheongju. On September 12 of that same year, he encountered an elderly man passing by the church. The man, who was walking with a limp, was Grandpa Choi Gwi-dong.

Curious, Father Oh followed him and witnessed Grandpa Choi sharing food—begged from others—with beggars inside a makeshift shack at the foot of Yongdamsan Mountain. Despite his own disability, Grandpa Choi had been caring for 18 beggars—people in even more dire straits than himself—for over 40 years.

That night, Father Oh realized that "even having the strength to beg for food is a grace from the Lord." The next day, he used his entire fortune of 1,300 won to buy cement and began making bricks. His goal was to build a home where those with nowhere else to turn could stay.

The house, completed with the help of parishioners, was named the "House of Love." Following a blessing ceremony on November 15, 1976, Grandpa Choi and the beggars moved into their new home. This act of love, born from one person's humble charity, became the seed that would eventually grow into the community known as Kkotdongne.

Making Someone Happy Daily

How to Make One Person Happy Each Day was the advice of an International Relief Expert and author writing in the Korean Catholic Times, who explains:

Is the desire to help others innate? In my experience, while that might be true in childhood, as we mature, we tend to help because of the sense of fulfillment it brings. Even in academia, the consensus is that while there are genetic differences regarding empathy and prosocial behavior, environmental factors, education, and life experiences also play a combined role.

I took charge of running household errands from the time I was six or seven years old. Once, I asked my mother why she always singled me out—the third child—for these tasks. Her answer was simple: "You always did them willingly without a word of complaint. If I told you to go to the store, you’d dash out the door before I’d even finished speaking." In short, I was the daughter who was easiest to send on errands.

One of those tasks involved relaying telephone messages. In the 1960s, when telephones were a rarity, our house had the only one in the neighborhood. Although it was for my father’s work as a journalist, it received far more calls containing important news for the neighbors. Whenever there was news of a daughter-in-law giving birth, a son getting into university, or a grandfather passing away, I would run all over the neighborhood to deliver the message. The neighborhood elders adored the "third daughter from the house by the well."

After entering elementary school, I was paired as a desk-mate with a friend who used crutches due to polio. Since we lived in the same direction, I simply carried her shoe bag on our way to and from school, yet I was showered with praise from her mother and our teachers. "What exactly did I do so well?" I wondered, feeling a mix of surprise, pride, and happiness.

A turning point in my "life of helping others" came during high school. As penance following confession before Easter, I was assigned to pray ten decades of the Rosary and perform ten acts of "sacrifice." When I asked the nun what "sacrificial penance" meant, she explained it as "willingly making a concession." From that day on, I began giving up my seat to the elderly on the bus, letting my younger sibling have the side dish I liked best, and yielding my turn for the restroom to a friend in a rush. People were grateful, and my mother even gave me extra allowance money, so the side income was quite nice, too.

The greatest gain from that "sacrificial penance" was discovering the "secret formula of helping": that making others happy makes me happy, too. Eventually, during my senior year of high school, I set a life goal to "make one person happy every day"—a practice I have continued ever since. There are countless ways to achieve this goal. A simple compliment—telling a friend an outfit looks great or praising a customer service agent for their kindness—works wonders. Helping a mother with a stroller or paying the bus fare for a student with insufficient funds on their transit card makes me feel even better.

On nights when I haven't managed to make anyone happy, I scroll through my phone contacts, pick someone, and send a message with an emoji asking how they are. Nine times out of ten, I get a delighted reply asking, "What brings this on so late at night?" In that moment, I’ve achieved the day's goal—just in the nick of time.

Over the past 50 years, I’ve brightened the day of at least 18,000 people—one person at a time—and felt a deep sense of fulfillment myself. Having brought joy to so many through small concessions, compliments, and minor acts of help, is there any other activity that offers such incredible value for the effort? That is why I intend to keep doing it for as long as I can. After all, you can do it regardless of whether your legs are weak or your pockets are empty.

That said, the Bible tells us, “Do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing” (Matthew 6:3), so I wonder if it is really okay to speak about this so openly. Still, if even one person smiles while reading this, then today’s goal of “bringing joy to one person” has been successfully achieved.

Living By Faith

Tuning In to Faith

Everyone Lives by Faith

Even those who reject faith live by their own beliefs.

If we examine our lives closely, we realize that we cannot live without faith. We drink coffee because we believe it contains no poison; if we believed it did, we would not drink it. We drink coffee, converse with others, and travel by plane—all because of faith.

If we believed that a terrorist had planted a time bomb on a plane bound for Israel, we would not board it. Thus, in our daily lives, we do not live by verifying every single detail, but rather by trusting and believing.

The more we distrust medication or a doctor, the slower the healing process becomes; conversely, the more we trust them, the faster the recovery. The more we place our trust in others, the closer we grow to them; the more we distrust them, the more distant the relationship becomes. Whether we are conscious of it or not, faith forms the deep foundation of our lives and constantly influences us.

Therefore, faith is a fundamental human act.  Some might counter this by arguing, "In reality, there are both believers and non-believers in the world; don't communists live well without believing in God? Therefore, it is possible to live without faith."

However, while this may be theoretically possible, it is impossible in actual life. If we broaden our perspective on human existence and examine it closely, we see those non-believers and communists alike live based on their own forms of faith.

Non-believers live with the firm conviction that "faith is a delusion—an act of believing in something that does not exist," while communists live with the certainty that "the God spoken of by Christians does not exist."

Thus, non-believers and communists are ultimately living by faith as well. No human being can stand outside the realm of faith; paradoxically, their vehement rejection of faith reveals that they, too, live by believing in something.

Today, there are countless non-believers and many who profess atheism. Following Nietzsche’s proclamation of the "death of God," indifference toward religion has steadily deepened in modern times. There are many aspects of this phenomenon that we, as believers, must deeply reflect upon and acknowledge. This situation has arisen because believers have failed to bear witness to the invisible God through their actions and lived practices in the world.

Mahatma Gandhi, the Indian sage, pointedly addressed this reality: "I love Jesus. But I dislike Christians. Because they do not resemble Jesus."

Such consequences arise when believers fail to live according to their faith and instead allow their faith to be shaped by the way they live. Therefore, we must now move beyond a faith consisting merely of words and become true Christians who bear witness—through love in our daily lives—to the faith we profess.

Written by Fr. Peter Kim Seok-tae  in the Catholic Times (Pastor, Doryong-dong Parish, Diocese of Daejeon)

The Bible Says:

The Window of the Ark column in the Catholic Times offers some thoughts to mull over in a recent piece by the Religious Peace Studies Lecturer at The Catholic University of Korea.

An expert on TV analyzes the political situation and concludes with the phrase, “You could view it as…” Instead of simply stating, “It is…” they say, “You could view it as…” Why do they speak this way? Fundamentally, this is a rhetorical strategy that defers judgment to the viewer, thereby suspending or evading the speaker's own responsibility. It is a form of linguistic self-defense designed to blur accountability by leaving an escape route open, effectively shifting the burden of final interpretation onto the person who “views it that way.”

It is also a style of “flexible authoritarianism”—maintaining control over the discourse while appearing to grant the other party a choice. It can be an expression of arrogance— “I set the standard, so you just need to accept what I say”—or it can appear as a tacit admission that “actually, even I am not certain.” Such a speaking style can undermine the credibility of the speaker's own words.

A similar issue lies in the phrase “I offer the words…” (e.g., “I offer the words of apology”). For instance, saying “I offer the words of apology” focuses on the *act* of saying sorry rather than the *feeling* of remorse itself. It resembles the outsourcing of emotion—like a third-party observer, the speaker brackets off their genuine feelings and merely adopts the form of an apology to fulfill a formal obligation. It may also be an unconscious manifestation of a desire to maintain a certain distance from the person receiving the apology, despite the words being spoken. This sense of distance makes the listener wonder, "Is that person truly apologizing?"

At this point, a question of faith arises: what is the difference between saying "You can view it as..." and "The Bible says..."? Christians often quote Jesus—for instance, saying, "Jesus said to love your neighbor as yourself." Yet, beneath such words, might there not be a subtle disbelief or avoidance—a feeling that "I couldn't possibly go that far" or "That’s something only Jesus could do; for an ordinary person..."? After all, someone who has truly believed or gained insight would not rely on others or on texts; instead, they would clearly state in their own words that one "must love one's neighbor."

The phrase "The Bible says..." can carry an underlying intent: "I am merely conveying a fact; it is up to *you* to accept what the Bible teaches." Even if the speaker does not fully agree with the Bible's content or live according to its teachings, they have not lied. They have simply conveyed the information that "it is written in the Bible." It is a way of speaking that maintains a certain distance between the Bible's message and the speaker's own life.

The problem is that while statements like "The Bible says..." may convey information, they fail to move the listener’s heart and mind. In contrast, a definitive statement—simply saying "It *is*..."—might strike some as arrogant or haughty; yet, paradoxically, one might also sense the power of truth emanating from the speaker’s inner self. This is because someone who has truly grasped the truth does not stop at conveying information alone.

A fortune teller does not speak vaguely to a client, saying, "It could be this way, or it could be that way." They speak with a fair amount of confidence. Even if a fortune teller’s prediction might ultimately prove incorrect, the client finds a basis for judgment and comfort in the practitioner’s clear words. If convinced of the accuracy of the judgment, the client may come to place their trust in the fortune teller personally. New religious movements sometimes emerge from this very psychology.

Language rooted in the Bible or church texts offers a sense of stability, yet it often lacks significant power. The ability to move a listener to voluntary action stems from the speaker’s clear sense of agency and humble confidence. When someone speaks assertively—stating things directly—and the listener senses an aura of truth in those words, a change occurs within the heart, prompting physical action. If a person speaks with urgency and vigor, while the listener perceives both confidence and humility, is that not the very mode of conversation through which truth operates? After all, that was precisely how Jesus conversed.

'Season of Creation'

Korean Church Unites for Ecological Conversion During ‘Season of Creation’

Diverse events across dioceses, including Masses for the protection of creation and climate justice marches, were reported by the Catholic Times.

The Korean Church is observing the "Season of Creation"—spanning from the "World Day of Prayer for the Care of Creation" on September 1 to the "Memorial of St. Francis of Assisi" on October 4—through prayer and practical actions to preserve the order of creation. The theme for 2026 is "Living Water." The Bishops' Conference Committee for Ecology and Environment, along with ecology-related organizations in each diocese, are reflecting on the significance of protecting the created world through a variety of programs, such as commemorative Masses, ecological tours, and climate justice marches.

In solidarity with Catholic Climate Action, the Committee for Environmental Pastoral Care of the Archdiocese of Seoul will hold an ecumenical prayer meeting on September 4 and organize an ecological tour of Naeseong Stream over two days starting on the 7th. 

The Department for Ecology, Environment, and Pastoral Care for Farmers and Fishermen of the Archdiocese of Daegu will celebrate the opening Mass for the Season of Creation on September 1 at 7:30 PM at Naedang Catholic Church, presided over by Coadjutor Archbishop Simon Kim Jong-kang. Protestant pastors and members of the "Big Forest Church"—a community dedicated to practicing an ecological lifestyle—have been invited to the Mass, which will take place at Naedang Catholic Church, a building designed to embody the spirit of the Second Vatican Council.

Additionally, on September 19 at 11:00 AM, an ecumenical prayer meeting will be held at the Palhyeon Wetland Ecological Park along the Geumho River in Daegu, bringing together people of various faiths to share ecological values. During the Season of Creation, a photo exhibition comparing the Nakdong River—plagued by algal blooms—with the Geum River—where the ecosystem is recovering—will be held in the lobby of the diocesan headquarters.

The closing Mass will be celebrated on October 3 at 11:00 a.m. at the diocesan headquarters' St. Mary’s Grotto. Following the Mass, a "Saturday Table" event for sharing sustainable food and seasonal produce, along with an organic market, will be held in the headquarters' plaza.

The Ecology and Environment Committee of the Diocese of Daejeon is launching a fundraising campaign to support neighbors suffering from the climate crisis. On September 19 at 2:00 p.m., a Mass for Climate Justice will be celebrated at the Catholic Cultural Center, presided over by Father Kim Dae-geon (Peter), the committee chair. This will be followed by the 4th Daejeon Climate Justice March on Euneungjeongi Street, held under the theme "Stop the Runaway Train Burning the Earth."

A "Mass for the Protection of Creation" during the Season of Creation will be celebrated on September 21 at 7:00 p.m. at Cheonan Ssangyong 3-dong Catholic Church. 

The Ecology and Environment Committee of the Diocese of Suwon will host an "Environmental Festival" on September 5 at 11:00 a.m. at Pyeongtaek Seojeong-dong Catholic Church. Various booths offering environmental experiences will be operated, covering topics such as the climate crisis, resource circulation, biodiversity, and energy conservation. Afterward, at 4:00 p.m., a Mass for the Day of Prayer for the Care of Creation will be celebrated, presided over by Auxiliary Bishop Moon Hee-jong (John the Baptist). On September 2 at 10:30 AM, the Diocese of Busan will celebrate Mass for the "Day of Prayer for the Care of Creation" at Namcheon Cathedral, presided over by Vicar General Bishop Shin Ho-chul (Pio).

Conversation in the Spirit

The training course for “Conversation in the Spirit” facilitators, organized by the Council of the Lay Apostolate of Korea, has concluded with the final session for the Daegu Ecclesiastical Province and was reported in the Catholic Times.  The initiative is significant as it trained lay facilitators—with laypeople taking the lead—to guide “Conversation in the Spirit” sessions within their respective dioceses, parishes, and organizations.

“Conversation in the Spirit” is a method rooted in prayer and meditation; it involves listening attentively to one another and collectively discerning what the Holy Spirit is saying to the community. The "Final Document" of the 16th General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops presents "conversation in the Spirit" as a "rich tool" for listening to and discerning what the Holy Spirit is saying to the various churches. In particular, the roles of facilitators—such as those who guide the conversation and those who record and organize the shared content—are crucial for ensuring that "conversation in the Spirit" proceeds smoothly.

To master these roles, participants spent three weeks prior to their respective provincial workshops reading the "Final Document" online and experiencing "Conversation in the Spirit" firsthand in small groups. Subsequently, during a one-day intensive workshop, they practiced the roles of facilitator and recorder and received guidance from researchers at the Institute for the Lay Apostolate.

The "Final Document" emphasizes the need for lay men and women to participate more broadly in the Church’s processes of discernment and decision-making and calls for the creation of formation opportunities—and the training of those who can support them—to spread a culture of ecclesial discernment within small communities and parishes.

Hate Speech Era

Living the Gospel column of the Korean Catholic Times offers some thoughts on 'An Era of Hatred'. What Should the Church Say in the Face of Hatred? Freedom of expression acts as a license to mock... We must spread the "Gospel's ripple effect" regarding human dignity.

Hatred is turning into a form of play. Historical tragedies are being repurposed as marketing slogans, and mockery directed at the deceased is widely consumed online. Derogatory remarks targeting specific regions, generations, or groups are tossed around casually, as if they were mere jokes. However, hate speech is not simply a matter of "words." It is an act that turns someone's suffering into a laughingstock and degrades human beings—stripping them of their dignity—to mere objects of ridicule. As discussions regarding societal responses to hate speech and discrimination gain momentum once again, what message should the church convey in this era of hatred?

With the easy use of hate speech and discriminatory language online, one can—often unwittingly—participate in spreading hatred and undermining someone's dignity simply by posting a comment or clicking "like."

Hate Speech Becomes "Play"

Campaigns related to the May 18 Democratization Movement in May and to the incident in which a High School baseball team used cheers that mocked the May 18 movement have seen a recent succession of expressions that use historical events to ridicule specific groups and further fuel social prejudice.

Hate speech differs from mere abusive language or offensive remarks. It refers to expressions that insult, disparage, or show contempt for specific individuals or groups—or justify and incite discrimination and violence—based on factors such as gender, disability, religion, age, region of origin, race, or sexual orientation. Therefore, determining whether a statement constitutes hate speech requires looking beyond the harshness of the language to consider whom it targets and what discriminatory effects it produces.

The nature of hate speech has also changed recently. A professor in a University Law School noted, "In the past, hate speech was often deliberate and purposeful, but today, we are seeing a spread of hate speech disguised as humor, mockery, or play." He added, "People tend to too easily join in on hate speech without realizing the implications."

Social media and algorithms are accelerating the spread of such expressions. Hate speech and discriminatory language are frequently consumed casually and encountered repeatedly in the form of online parody content or (short, shareable internet images). In this process, individuals may undermine someone's dignity without even realizing the nature of their own words. Repeated mockery fosters a habit of viewing specific people or groups as objects of ridicule, which can lead to further acts of hatred.

A "Catholic POLL" survey, jointly conducted by this publication and the Seoul Archdiocese’s Good News Team, revealed that the faithful also recognize the spread of hate speech as a serious social issue. In the survey, conducted among 471 believers from August 5 to 19, 425 respondents, (90.2%) stated that the spread of hate speech has a serious impact on society. Essentially, nine out of ten believers viewed the proliferation of hate speech as a grave problem. However, there was a gap between recognizing the issue and taking actual action. When encountering a culture where hate speech is consumed as memes, buzzwords, or jokes, 68.8% of respondents stated they viewed it negatively or blocked the content because it was offensive. In contrast, only 15.1% said they felt offended but took no specific action, while just 9.3% reported the expression or raised an objection.

A professor at The Catholic University of Korea—identified the normalization of online hate speech and the mindset that "it’s not my problem" as the causes of this gap. "As encountering hate speech in the form of brief comments or memes has become commonplace online and in daily life, our sensitivity toward hate has naturally become dulled." He added that unless the attack is directed at oneself or one's own community, people tend to step back and consume the hate speech merely as a form of content.

As social issues stemming from hate and discrimination escalate, the government is implementing policies based on strict punitive measures—such as penalizing mockery and hate speech, imposing punitive damages, and shutting down websites that tolerate or encourage such behavior.

In the "Catholic POLL" regarding the government's and society's response to the spread of online hate speech, 34.8% of respondents advocated for active regulation through laws and systems, while 45.4% called for a certain level of sanctions and management. Combined, these figures show that 80.2% of respondents recognized the need for government and societal intervention through sanctions and oversight. On the other hand, 19.1% of respondents stated that government intervention should be minimized or avoided altogether. This suggests that while there is a consensus on the need to address hate speech, there is also significant apprehension that state regulation could infringe upon freedom of expression or lead to excessive control.

The university professor argued, "It is true that hate speech taking the form of mockery is more difficult to regulate legally. Because the manifestations of discrimination and hate have become more diverse, we need to establish basic social norms defining what constitutes discrimination and hate before resorting to punitive regulations. We also need to enact an anti-discrimination law as a minimal institutional mechanism to heighten society's sensitivity to human rights."