The Groaning River and Public Theology: A Proposal for Hydro-Ochlos
Rev. Dr Seoyoung Kim (Executive Committee Member of the World Council of Churches)
Abstract
Major rivers in contemporary Korea have typically been treated primarily as objects used for development and management with the goal of efficiency and growth. However, the recent condition of rivers often becoming stagnant due to green algae and poor management cannot be explained solely as an environmental issue. The river has long been silenced by technological control, yet it now speaks through its wounded body. This study interprets these changes as a form of theological groaning arising from a distorted relationship between God, nature, and humanity.
Drawing on Jürgen Moltmann’s pneumatological understanding of creation (1985), this study first reimagines the river not as a manageable resource but as a dwelling place of the Spirit where flow represents divine vitality. From this perspective, the river is no longer a silent backdrop. Instead, it presents itself as a relational being that testifies physically to the results produced by our choices and indifference. Peter Scott’s discussion of the “common realm” (2003) further illuminates the river as a meeting place for humanity, God, and nature. Additionally, Jane Bennett’s New Materialism (2010) and Ahn Byung-mu’s use of “Ochlos theology” (2013) provide a perspective for viewing beings who are marginalised yet remain vibrant. Based on these theories, this study seeks to express the reality of the river using the language of “Hydro-Ochlos”. This is becoming a theological way of stating that the river is a being with a voice that reveals many significant crises of today.
In addition to these issues, my study argues that the way in which toxicity returns to human life reveals the deep entanglement between the human and the non-human. In this place of entanglement, public theology must seek practices that listen to the groaning of the river and respond to it. This study references Hartmut Rosa’s concept of “Resonance” (2019) and Heinrich Bedford-Strohm’s “Bilingual Practice” (2011) to explore how a river’s suffering might lead to the development of forms of social and theological responsibility.
Introduction
Water naturally flows from high places to low places and facilitates life. However, many rivers we encounter today face a reality in which they can no longer flow freely. Technological civilisation and administrative systems that prioritise efficiency and development have confined rivers within concrete weirs. They have reinforced the tendency to treat water, the source of life, merely as a manageable resource or chemical substance devoid of relational meaning.[1] This rationale of control goes beyond policy issues. It reveals the limitations of a worldview that has treated nature in a human-centred manner.
The green algae recently observed in Korean rivers needs to be viewed anew within this context. The toxicity emitted by stagnant water can be read as a theological groaning arising from the place where the relationship between God, nature, and humanity has been distorted (Rom 8:22). This goes beyond treating the idea that ‘water speaks’ as a mere metaphor. It may be a tangible signal in which the wounded body of the river testifies to the current crisis and calls for change. From this perspective, green algae can be understood as an appeal from wounded water saying, “I want to flow again” and the cry of marginalised non-human beings. The concept of Hydro-Ochlos proposed in this study is the theological language that identifies this pained voice.
This study seeks to explore how theology can respond to this groaning of the river. First, drawing on Moltmann’s pneumatological understanding of creation (1985), it reinterprets the river as a dwelling place of the Spirit, challenging the predominant mechanistic worldview. From this foundation, Scott’s discussion of the “common realm” (2003) allows the river to be re-envisioned as a relational site where humanity, God, and nature meet. Next, by referring to Bennett’s New Materialism (2010) and Ahn’s Minjung Theology (2013), this study understands the river as a being that maintains a resilient vitality even amid conditions of marginalisation. Furthermore, through Alaimo’s concept of “trans-corporeality” (2010), the study examines how the toxicity returning from the river to human daily life binds us into a vulnerable community. Finally, based on Rosa’s (2019) resonance theory and Bedford-Strohm’s public theology (2011), the possibility of listening to the river’s groaning and connecting it to social and theological theory and practice is discussed.
- Technological Control and Ecological Silence
To understand the ecological crisis currently being experienced by Korean rivers, it is necessary to examine the way in which they have been treated over the past few decades. During the period of rapid industrialisation, rivers were perceived not as living ecological beings but as sources of water for national development and/or sewage discharge channels. This was eventually recognised and responded to as part of the Four Major Rivers Restoration Project in the late 2000s. The government at the time presented this project as a Korean-style “Green New Deal” that encompassed water quality improvement, ecological restoration, and response to climate emergency.[2] However, massive structural changes occurred, such as the construction of 16 large weirs along the length of the rivers and the deep dredging of riverbeds. As a result, the flow slowed down, and the rivers were transformed into spaces of stagnant water in which the river could no longer sustain its own ecological respiration.
The need to tackle the consequences of industrialisation is also confirmed through scientific data. A recent analysis in the Yeongsan River basin demonstrates that “water residence time” decreases by more than 70% when the weir gates are fully opened rather than closed.[3] This demonstrates how significantly the flow of water had been trapped while the weirs were in place. The researchers point out that such a long residence time becomes a critical condition for the explosive increase of harmful cyanobacteria when combined with high water temperatures. In other words, the green algae crisis of today can be understood as a structural result emerging from the accumulation of political and technological choices that have restricted the river’s flow without sufficiently considering ecological danger signals.[4]
This process reveals a facet of mechanistic thinking that has regarded nature as a “standing-reserve” available for use at any time.[5] The river that cannot flow is no longer perceived as a being with ecological dynamism; it remains merely an object to be managed and a site for technological intervention. In this context, the silence of the river can be understood as a state in which the inherent agency and relationality of nature are excluded, that is, ecological silence. The green algae occurring within this silence are a material phenomenon produced by human-centred development, and it can be read as one which reveals the relational rupture with nature that we have long overlooked.
Since the beginning of the modern era, nature has been treated primarily from the perspective of scientific categories, figures, and manageable resources. This perspective tended to reduce nature to measurable matter rather than viewing it as a complex life system or a relational being. Theology was not unrelated to this trend, and nature sometimes remained on the periphery of soteriological concern. Consequently, attempts to sufficiently reflect on nature as a central site where God and humanity meet were inevitably limited.
In this context, Moltmann’s pneumatological understanding of creation provides vital theological resources to address these limitations. Moltmann rejects the dualistic view that distances God from creation, emphasising instead the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (Shekinah) within all creation.[6] According to his view, the Spirit of life is intrinsically present in all living things. Therefore, the river is understood not as a simple object separated from the Creator, but as a living space shaped by the Spirit’s life-giving presence.
From this perspective, the act of obstructing the river’s flow can be understood as weakening the ‘breath of God’ (Ruach). As Moltmann asserts, since creation is the “open system” of the Spirit, artificially closing it for the sake of efficiency creates conditions in which the immanent presence of God cannot fully emerge.[7] Therefore, the silence of the river can be understood as a theological silence in which the vitality and rhythm of the Spirit are diminished.
In a complementary way, Scott’s theology provides important insights that open our perspective on nature anew. Scott criticises the Christian metaphysical schema for pushing nature into the background behind the stage of human activity and treating it as a manageable external object.[8] This perspective of separation resulted in nature being reduced to a controllable resource rather than a relational field between God and humanity.
Scott moves beyond this view, emphasising that God, nature, and humanity are in an inseparable relationship, and proposes understanding the created world again as a “common realm.”[9] The common realm is a relational and political space where beings live while responding to and influencing one another. Within this framework, nature is reinterpreted as a being possessing a form of “sociality”, that is, a relational actor exchanging energy and the flow of life.[10]
From this perspective, the act of blocking or altering the flow of a river becomes a theological and political event that reorganises relationships with neighbours within the larger community created by God. Preventing the river from flowing can be read not only as disrupting the rhythm of the ecosystem but also as an act of blocking the response and sociality of coexisting beings. The resulting stagnation and algae become signals of rupture and public appeals arising from broken relationships.
Therefore, the restoration of the river cannot be reduced solely to issues of water quality improvement or management technology. This involves a more fundamental theological question that asks again what kind of being we understand nature to be and in what kind of relationship we should live. The abnormal signs of the ecosystem invite us to examine where the relationships we have formed have become unaligned, beyond scientific figures. In this respect, the restoration of the river stands as an important task to which eco-theology and public theology respond together.
- Hydro-Ochlos: Material Agency and the Public Nature of Ecological Resistance
As examined in the previous section, the perspective centred on technology and development has confined the river within massive structures and weakened its inherent flow. The justification of “flood control” appeared to be a task of caring for the river, but it often served to make the river an object of management and control. Consequently, the river has gradually been pushed out of the common realm where God, nature, and humanity coexist. The river begins to speak to us in the most painful way. The green algae covering the river in summer and the smell emanating from it can be read as a signal revealing the rupture in long-standing relationships and as an appeal for care. This section listens to these signals and seeks to understand the river through the language of Hydro-Ochlos based on Bennett’s New Materialism and Ahn’s Ochlos discourse.
To read the changes in the river as a political appeal, it is necessary to first examine Bennett’s concept of “vibrant matter.” She criticises the mode of thought that views matter as passive material moved by human intention. She states that matter itself possesses a “thing-power” to produce events and influence humans.[11] In particular, Bennett’s concept of “assemblage” emphasises that matter does not operate alone but functions through the entanglement of various elements, including humans, technology, climate, and ecological conditions.[12]
Applying this perspective to Korean rivers, one can confirm that green algae are the result of a complex event that cannot be explained solely by increased nutrient salts or rising water temperatures. Slowed flow velocity, climate change, concrete weirs, and the cyanobacteria rapidly breeding within them can be viewed as a ‘material assemblage’ formed through their entanglement. This green aggregation strongly stimulates our vision and sense of smell, and it exerts the power of agency that triggers responses from society and the government. Although the river does not use human language, it clearly communicates the fact that “we are connected to one another” in the public space through the material changes that have occurred to it.
If Bennett explains how non-human beings intervene in the public realm, Ahn’s Minjung Theology clarifies the theological location of such marginalised beings. Through an analysis of the Gospel of Mark, Ahn distinguishes between the Laos, who are protected at the centre of society, and the Ochlos, who are pushed out of that structure.[13] The latter are beings who have neither institutional protection nor sufficient opportunity to raise their own voices. Applying this ‘double act’ to today’s ecological reality, the river can also be viewed as a being that exists within human society but is alienated from its protection and care. Outwardly, and historically, it has been called the ‘lifeline of the nation,’ but it has been marginalised by having its flow restricted and even its capacity to heal itself constrained within the logic of development. In this respect, the river can be understood as the modern Hydro-Ochlos, that is, an excluded voice taking the form of water.
The interplay of the insights from Bennett and Ahn is significant at this point in the argument. Bennett’s new materialism moves beyond the modern dichotomy that separates subject from object and human from non-human, and in doing so attributes a distinctive form of material agency to the river. Ahn’s discourse on the Ochlos shows that such agency is not confined to a physical or biological response but can be understood as a political event that creates subtle disruptions within the dominant order.
This approach does not attempt to portray the river as a subject with intentional agency. Rather, it recognises the active vitality of matter described by Bennett and highlights the ways in which this vitality resembles the unexpected interventions of marginalised beings. In this sense, the river as Hydro-Ochlos does not operate as a subject in the modern sense, but functions as a post-subjective agent that initiates change and exerts an influence on human society, thereby inviting a reconsideration of existing systems of control. Such an understanding opens a theological imagination that views the river as an interdependent being.
Expanding Ahn’s conceptual distinction, the Ochlos in the Gospel of Mark can be understood not merely as a passive crowd but as an unpredictable multitude that challenged the established religious and political order surrounding Jesus. Although situated on the periphery, they were the ones who opened a new messianic horizon from within that marginality. Applying this dynamic to the river, the occurrence of green algae can be interpreted as a mode of revealing the structures of oppression that had long remained invisible.
The experiences of marginalised beings are often situated in circumstances which do not allow them to be expressed in words or even heard properly if spoken. Instead, they tell their stories through bodily changes and groans in daily life. Just as Suh called this the “Han,” the river also sends us signals through its wounded body while having lost its original language of flow.[14] The river water turned into green algae can be read as a symptom of sorrow and appeal stemming from the severance of relationships. Just as Ahn viewed Jesus as an “event” that arose together with the Ochlos, the green algae phenomenon of today is an “event” that has appeared because of the continued inappropriate relationship between humans and nature. Simultaneously, it is a cry for restoration.
Ultimately, the river as Hydro-Ochlos can be understood at the place where the material vibrancy described by Bennett meets the event of the periphery emphasised by Ahn. The change in the river revealed in deep green resonates with the groaning of creation mentioned by Paul in Romans chapter 8. For Paul, groaning was not an expression of despair but a sign of waiting and hope for life. Likewise, the signal emanating from the river is also heard as a public appeal to which we must respond as coexisting beings. Hydro-Ochlos speaks to us now through its wounded body.
Given this framework, we can approach the intersection between the biblical exegetical concept of ochlos and the narrative of han in light of Paul’s ecological sensibility in Romans. If the “groaning of creation” is understood as a sign of waiting and hope for life, then a public theology of science emphasizes intercorporeality and an enactive stance that brings forth meaningful forms of life. Such an approach incorporates the significance of epigenetics—namely, the socio‑ecological impact on human life as well as other living systems—into public theology by interrogating regimes of biopolitics and technological governmentality that inscribe themselves upon the social‑ecological body. (see Paul Chung, “Autopoiesis, Epigenetic Mechanisms, and Punctuated Theory” https://youngsung.devmisc.com/global-exchange-post/ian-barbiur-and-critical-realism/).
- Toxic Entanglement and the Sorrowful Eucharist
In the previous section, we observed that the river as Hydro-Ochlos reveals the suffering of marginalised forms of life through green algae and stench. However, this groaning goes beyond the boundaries of the river and permeates deeply into human daily life. The pain experienced by the river is not a problem that remains in a specific location; it is also a testimony demonstrating how deeply humanity and nature are entangled with each other. Based on Alaimo’s concept of “trans-corporeality” this section examines the pathways through which toxicity travels and reflects on this theologically within the metaphor of a ‘Sorrowful Eucharist.’
We sometimes consider the human body as an independent being distinct from the external environment. However, Alaimo points out that this perception is an illusion. Her concept of “trans-corporeality” awakens us to the fact that the human body is not separated from the natural environment by fixed boundaries but is an open place that constantly interpenetrates and exchanges influences.[15] In other words, environmental change is not an external event irrelevant to me, but a material reality that flows into our life process.
This concept holds a very specific significance in the situation faced by Korean rivers. Recent environmental toxicity studies repeatedly demonstrate that the rivers’ toxins do not remain confined to the water. Microcystin detected in the Nakdong River and major streams accumulates in crops through irrigation water and agricultural land, and it also spreads in the form of aerosols.[16] Consequently, to the extent that the river is wounded, that pain quietly travels into our food and even into our bodies.
This circulation of toxicity demonstrates that no ‘safe distance’ exists between humanity and nature. The same applies to those who farm along the river. Rather than being subjects who damage nature, they are beings who can be called another group of the weak, that is, ‘Human Ochlos,’ who have no choice but to rely on river water amidst the chaos of climate change and water management systems. They witness the changes in the river from the closest distance and must endure the double vulnerability of that water entering their own bodies through the crops. The river and the farmers have come to share each other’s pain through the invisible pathways of toxicity.
If we express this reality where toxicity permeates into our food and into the air we breathe in theological language, it can be called a ‘Sorrowful Eucharist.’ If the Eucharist is a place that confirms the solidarity of life by sharing the flesh and blood of Christ, our table today is also a place that shares the pain of damaged nature. This circulation, in which violent intervention committed against the river eventually returns as matter that forms our bodies, is a paradoxical reality revealing the depth of the relationship connecting humanity and nature.
However, this Sorrowful Eucharist does not mean only despair. Rather, through this process, it is revealed once again that humanity and nature are not separate beings but a vulnerable community. The fact that the pain of the river permeates our bodies means that our wholeness is not possible without the healing of the river. If we trace the flow of toxicity, we encounter the ‘common vulnerability’ shared by the human and the non-human. Upon this recognition of vulnerability, an ethic of solidarity that cares for and takes responsibility for each other’s wounds can begin. The toxicity originating from the river thus approaches us as a public message, disclosing how profoundly our lives are entangled.
- A Listening Heart and Bilingual Solidarity
The reality of the ‘Sorrowful Eucharist’ examined in the previous section, that is, the painful entanglement where toxicity permeates across human and non-human bodies, requires a fundamental change in attitude from us. The logic of the ‘accelerated society,’ which viewed the river solely as an object of control and efficiency, is finally revealing its limitations through the pain of our bodies. What is needed now is not a hasty technological solution but the recovery of ethical sensitivity capable of listening to the signals of wounded beings. This section connects Rosa’s resonance theory and Bedford-Strohm’s public theology to seek a “listening heart” that responds to the groaning of Hydro-Ochlos and examines how it can be expanded into concrete practice within ecumenical solidarity.
Rosa diagnoses the ecological alienation of modern society because of “acceleration” and “objectification” that seek to make the world a constantly controllable object. Rosa states that this attitude eventually creates a “mute universe” where the world no longer speaks to humans.[17] The “Resonance” proposed by Rosa is the cessation of this dominant attitude and the recovery of a relationship that responds to the subtle vibrations sent by the world.[18] If this concept is applied to the wounded river, what public theology must recover first is the “listening heart” exemplified by Solomon (1 Kings 3:9), that is, the inner sensitivity that responds to the suffering of the other. A resonant relationship begins when we do not treat the green algae and stench of the river merely as pollution but recognise them as a desperate appeal conveying the pain of the ecosystem and the community. This means interpreting the groaning of Hydro-Ochlos as a public voice calling us to self-examination.
However, for the vibrations of resonance occurring internally to achieve social change, a language to express and mediate it appropriately is necessary. At this point, the “bilingualism” described by Bedford-Strohm clarifies the direction in which public theology should proceed. According to Bedford-Strohm, public theology must be able to speak both the ‘language of faith’ used within the church and the ‘public language’ capable of communicating with citizens, scientists, and policymakers in society. [19] In the face of the ecological crisis, bilingualism is a process of translating the non-verbal groaning of Hydro-Ochlos into the language of policy and institutions. For instance, the church’s confession of ‘restoration of the created world’ can be expressed in the public sphere as concrete actions such as opening floodgates to restore natural flow velocity or support policies for climate-vulnerable farmers. Through this process, the restoration of the river flow and the survival of residents are established as public tasks to be solved together.
Resonance and the bilingual approach are revealed within diverse practices. Within the church community, the ‘Eco Grief liturgy’ remembering the suffering of the river can be recovered. For example, placing river water in the ritual space and praying together during the season when green algae intensify can become an act of educational resonance through which the community senses the pain of the river. In the social sphere, this leads to the practice of citizen science and policy advocacy. The cooperation of local churches with environmental organisations becomes an important public basis for demanding the rights of the river and local ecological justice beyond emotional appeals.
These regional practices hold broader significance within the “Ecumenical Decade of Climate Justice Action (2025–2034)” launched by the World Council of Churches (WCC). The WCC defines the climate crisis as a matter of justice involving the survival of marginalised neighbours and non-human beings and calls for solidarity with “The Living Planet.”[20] Our effort, facing the groaning of the river, is a place where the struggles of South American churches to protect the Amazon forest and the stories of Pacific islanders praying against rising sea levels connect as one. The WCC provides a space for such global solidarity and awakens us to the fact that caring for local rivers is a journey to heal the earth.
Resonance is a path of public awareness that begins with subtle vibrations in the heart, leads to institutional change, and finally expands to the global community of life. When we listen to the groaning of Hydro-Ochlos, we can begin the practice of solidarity that acknowledges mutual vulnerability without turning away from that pain.
- Conclusion
This study has sought to interpret the green algae in Korean rivers not as a simple environmental issue but as a theological event revealing the site where the relationship between God, nature, and humanity has been distorted. The river endured silence under technological control, but it has begun to speak through its wounded body. The term Hydro-Ochlos was proposed in response to this pain. It serves as a theological language that articulates the river as no longer a passive object but a relational reality testifying to the contradictions of the times from a marginalised position. Furthermore, the reality that toxicity permeates our daily lives reveals us to be a community that shares a common vulnerability.
Confronting this reality of entanglement, public theology must seek a path of response. This endeavour begins with recovering the “Resonance” described by Rosa, which is the “listening heart” capable of listening to the suffering of the other. Such internal resonance must not remain a mere emotional reaction. It can lead to public change only when translated into policy and citizen action through the “Bilingual Practice” proposed by Bedford-Strohm. Emerging forms of solidarity between churches and local citizens resonate with the “Ecumenical Decade of Climate Justice Action” declared by the WCC, and it holds the potential to expand into a broader solidarity towards a global community of life.
Ultimately, the ecological peace we aim for is not a perfection without wounds but a processual reality of revealing mutual vulnerability and sharing that pain. The river remains wounded and its toxicity persists, yet this very site of incompleteness becomes the space where true resonance begins. This theological journey may serve as a modest beginning toward reopening the path of life while flowing alongside the river as it seeks renewal.
- Bibliography
Ahn, Byung-Mu. “Jesus and Minjung in the Gospel of Mark.” In Reading Minjung Theology in the Twenty-First Century: Selected Writings by Ahn Byung-Mu and Modern Critical Responses, edited by Yung-suk Kim and Jin-ho Kim. Eugene: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2013.
Alaimo, Stacy. Bodily Natures: Science, Environment, and the Material Self. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2010.
Bedford-Strohm, Heinrich. “Public Theology of Ecology and Civil Society.” In Religion and Ecology in the Public Sphere, edited by Celia Deane-Drummond and Heinrich Bedford-Strohm. London: T&T Clark, 2011.
Bennett, Jane. Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things. Durham: Duke University Press, 2010.
Heidegger, Martin. The Question Concerning Technology and Other Essays. Translated by William Lovitt. New York: Harper & Row, 1977.
Illich, Ivan. H₂O and the Waters of Forgetfulness: Reflections on the Historicity of “stuff”. Berkeley: Heyday Books, 1985.
Kim, Jinnam., Gyudae Lee, Soyeong Han, Minji Kim, Jaeho Shin, and Seungjun Lee. “Microbial communities in aerosol generated from cyanobacterial bloom-affected freshwater bodies: an exploratory study in Nakdong River, South Korea.” Frontiers in Microbiology 14 (2023):1203317. 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1203317.
Kim, Sungjin., and Sewoong Chung. “Causal impact analysis of weir opening on cyanobacterial blooms and water quality in the Yeongsan River, Korea: A bayesian structural time-series analysis and median difference test.” Science of The Total Environment 924 (2024): 171646. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969724017881.
Ministry of Environment. “Four Major River Restoration Project of Republic of KOREA.” Korea Environmental Policy Bulletin 3, vol. VII (2009): 1-12. https://wedocs.unep.org/rest/api/core/bitstreams/327f64a8-3002-4a6a-b8bb-b21fe495b587/content.
Moltmann, Jürgen. God in Creation: An ecological doctrine of creation. London: SCM Press, 1985.
Rosa, Hartmut. Resonance: A Sociology of Our Relationship to the World. Translated by James C. Wagner. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2019.
Scott, Peter Manley. A Political Theology of Nature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
________. A Theology of Postnatural Right. Berlin: LIT Verlag, 2019.
Suh, Namdong. “Towards a Theology of Han.” In Minjung Theology: People as the Subject of History, edited by Commission on Theological Concerns of the Christian Conference of Asia. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis books, 1983.
World Council of Churches. “The Living Planet: Seeking a Just and Sustainable Global Community.” Accessed Dec 12, 2025. https://www.oikoumene.org/sites/default/files/2022-10/ADOPTED-PIC01.2rev-The-Living-Planet-Seeking-a-Just-and-Sustainable-Global-Community.pdf.
Yun, Sun-Jin. “Experts’ Social Responsibility in the Process of Large-Scale Nature-Transforming National Projects: Focusing on the Case of the Four Major Rivers Restoration Project in Korea.” Development and Society 43, no. 1 (2014): 109-141. https://www.jstor.org/stable/deveandsoci.43.1.109.
[1] cf. Ivan Illich, H₂O and the Waters of Forgetfulness: Reflections on the Historicity of “stuff” (Berkeley: Heyday Books, 1985).
[2] Ministry of Environment, “Four Major River Restoration Project of Republic of KOREA,” Korea Environmental Policy Bulletin 3, vol. VII (2009): 1.
[3] Sungjin Kim, Sewoong Chung, “Causal impact analysis of weir opening on cyanobacterial blooms and water quality in the Yeongsan River, Korea: A bayesian structural time-series analysis and median difference test,” Science of The Total Environment 924 (2024): 171646.
[4] Sun-Jin Yun, “Experts’ Social Responsibility in the Process of Large-Scale Nature-Transforming National Projects: Focusing on the Case of the Four Major Rivers Restoration Project in Korea,” Development and Society 43, no. 1 (2014): 138-139.
[5] Martin Heidegger, The Question Concerning Technology and Other Essays, trans. William Lovitt (New York: Harper & Row, 1977), 17.
[6] Jürgen Moltmann, God in Creation: An ecological doctrine of creation (London: SCM Press, 1985), 15.
[7] Ibid., 207.
[8] Peter Manley Scott, A Theology of Postnatural Right (Berlin: LIT Verlag, 2019), 119.
[9] Peter Manley Scott, A Political Theology of Nature (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 13.
[10] Scott, A Theology of Postnatural Right, 22-23.
[11] Jane Bennett, Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things (Durham: Duke University Press, 2010), xvii.
[12] Ibid., 5.
[13] Byung-Mu Ahn, “Jesus and Minjung in the Gospel of Mark,” in Reading Minjung Theology in the Twenty-First Century: Selected Writings by Ahn Byung-Mu and Modern Critical Responses, ed. Yung-suk Kim and Jin-ho Kim (Eugene: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2013), 60-61.
[14] Namdong Suh, “Towards a Theology of Han,” in Minjung Theology: People as the Subject of History, ed. Commission on Theological Concerns of the Christian Conference of Asia (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis books, 1983), 64.
[15] Stacy Alaimo, Bodily Natures: Science, Environment, and the Material Self (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2010), 2.
[16] Jinnam Kim et al., “Microbial communities in aerosol generated from cyanobacterial bloom-affected freshwater bodies: an exploratory study in Nakdong River, South Korea,” Frontiers in Microbiology 14 (2023):1203317.
[17] Hartmut Rosa, Resonance: A Sociology of Our Relationship to the World, trans. James C. Wagner (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2019), 166.
[18] Ibid., 29.
[19] Heinrich Bedford-Strohm, “Public Theology of Ecology and Civil Society,” in Religion and Ecology in the Public Sphere, ed. Celia Deane-Drummond and Heinrich Bedford-Strohm (London: T&T Clark, 2011), 47.
[20] “The Living Planet: Seeking a Just and Sustainable Global Community,” World Council of Churches, accessed Dec 12, 2025, https://www.oikoumene.org/sites/default/files/2022-10/ADOPTED-PIC01.2rev-The-Living-Planet-Seeking-a-Just-and-Sustainable-Global-Community.pdf.