“Church Closure” Risks in South Korea’s New Bill

South Korea’s controversial religion bill sparks fierce debate over Lee administration’s obvious attempt to exercise extensive state power over religion as “church closures” loom

“Why Korea’s new religion bill is rattling Protestant churches” was the headline of an article published by The Korea Times on 17^th April. The English-language daily writes that South Korea is once again confronting a sensitive and deeply rooted constitutional question: how far should the state go in regulating religion, particularly when faith-based organizations are accused of intersecting with politics?

See also Christian Groups Decry Lee’s Faith Control Laws

See also 7,000 Protesting Proposed Anti-Religious Law

See also South Korea’s Slide Toward Authoritarianism

See also Vague New Law, Broad Powers: Concerns Mount

See also Political Influence: Harsher Sentence on Appeal

See also 30 Days Longer Medical Release for Mother Han

A newly proposed amendment to the Civil Act from the left-leaning Lee Jae-myung (이재명) administration has ignited a contentious national debate, exposing fault lines not only between lawmakers and religious leaders, but also within the country’s diverse Protestant community. The bill, which, according to the governing coalition, aims to sanction religious groups accused of systematic political interference, has drawn strong reactions – ranging from support among liberally minded scholars to alarm and resistance among conservative church leaders.

At the center of the controversy lies a push by the current Lee administration for the political realm to control the religious realm, in a way similar to recent steps for the political branch of government to control the country’s judiciary.

The new legislation was introduced by the governing parties in the wake of developments in Japan, where a court ordered the dissolution of the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification following allegations tied to its political entanglements. Inspired in part by that precedent, South Korean lawmakers are now considering whether similar legal mechanisms are necessary to prevent what they describe as “religious organizations exerting undue political influence or violating election laws under the guise of spiritual activity.”

According to The Korea Times, the proposed bill would grant the government the authority to revoke legal recognition of religious organizations and even confiscate their assets if they are found to have “engaged in political interference that harms the public interest.” While the measure is widely interpreted as targeting controversial groups such as the Family Federation and Shincheonji Church of Jesus [See editor’s note below], its language is broad enough to raise concerns about potential overreach. Critics argue that the bill’s lack of precise definitions could allow authorities to apply it selectively – or even politically – against mainstream religious institutions.

This ambiguity has fueled anxiety among Protestant leaders, particularly those aligned with conservative or politically active congregations. Many pastors perceive the legislation not as a narrowly tailored regulatory tool, but as a potential instrument of suppression. Some have gone so far as to label it a “Church Closure Act”, warning that it could be used to silence religious voices critical of the government. For these leaders, preaching on social or political issues is not an abuse of religious freedom but an essential component of their faith practice.

The debate has been especially intense among figures who have previously engaged in political advocacy. For instance, pastor Son Hyun-bo (손현보) of the Segyero Church (세계로교회) in Busan who supported former conservative President Yoon Suk-yeol (윤석열) and participated in election-related activities, argue that his actions were mischaracterized as illegal campaigning. Conservative pastors contend that expressing moral or political views from a religious platform should not be equated with partisan interference. From their perspective, the principle of separating religion and state is meant to prevent state control over religion – not to exclude religious perspectives from public discourse.

This interpretation, however, is not universally accepted. Legal scholars and theologians have pointed out that the constitutional principle in question – South Korea’s prohibition on establishing a state religion and its mandate for separation – serves a dual purpose. It protects religious freedom while also safeguarding democratic institutions from undue influence by organized faith groups. In this view, the issue is not whether religious individuals can participate in politics, but whether institutional religion should wield structured political power.

Interestingly, the Korean debate echoes similar tensions in other parts of the world, particularly in the United States, where the concept of church-state separation has long been contested. There, The Korea Times points out, some political and religious leaders, e.g. House Speaker Mike Johnson, argue that the principle has been misinterpreted, claiming it was intended to shield religious institutions from government interference rather than to exclude religion from policymaking. This perspective has gained traction alongside the rise of what the article calls “Christian nationalism”, a movement that seeks to integrate religious identity more directly into national politics.

Back in South Korea, however, many within the broader Protestant community are urging caution. Major umbrella organizations, like United Christian Churches of Korea and the National Council of Churches in Korea, representing a wide spectrum of churches have expressed concern about the bill’s potential for misuse. They do not necessarily oppose the “progressive” Lee Jae-myung administration’s goal of dismantling and seizing the assets of what some traditional Christians perceive as “heretical” movements, like the Family Federation and Shincheonji Church of Jesus [See editor’s note below]. Yet, South Korean protestants generally emphasize the need for clear legal standards and safeguards against administrative abuse. Without such protections, they warn, the legislation could inadvertently undermine religious freedom rather than strengthen it.

At the same time, a number of theologians and church scholars are calling attention to the risks of politicizing religion itself. They argue that when religious institutions become closely aligned with political agendas, they risk compromising their moral authority. Faith, in this sense, becomes instrumentalized – used as a tool to advance specific political goals rather than as a source of ethical guidance. Over time, this can erode public trust in religious organizations and blur the distinction between spiritual leadership and political activism.

Some scholars have also highlighted the broader societal implications of the current debate. As public attention focuses on constitutional interpretation and political conflict, there is a risk that the stated motivation behind the bill – addressing legal violations by certain religious groups – may be sidelined by an administration seeking control over the religious realm.

Ultimately, the debate over South Korea’s proposed religion bill raises fundamental questions about the relationship between religion and politics in today’s highly polarized world. Authoritarian states already have next to total control over religion. What is truly striking, is how powerful politicians in democratic nation like South Korea and Japan have become advocates of a policy toward religion that is reminiscent of how today’s China deals with the religious issue.

See also Christian Groups Decry Lee’s Faith Control Laws

See also 7,000 Protesting Proposed Anti-Religious Law

See also South Korea’s Slide Toward Authoritarianism

See also Vague New Law, Broad Powers: Concerns Mount

See also Shocking Pretrial Detention of Faith Leader (95)

See also Political Influence: Harsher Sentence on Appeal

See also 30 Days Longer Medical Release for Mother Han

See also Family Federation Secures 2 ISO Certifications

See also Election Campaign Fuels Unificationism Claims

See also History Often Vindicates the Dreamers

Text: Knut Holdhus, editor

Featured image above: Protesting “church closure bill” proposed by left-leaning Lee Jae-myung administration. Illustration: ChatGPT 18th April 2026. 

[Editor’s note: Shincheonji, officially known as Shincheonji Church of Jesus, the Temple of the Tabernacle of the Testimony, is a new religious movement founded in South Korea in 1984 by Lee Man-hee, who claims to be the promised pastor mentioned in the Bible’s Book of Revelation. Shincheonji teaches that the Book of Revelation is being fulfilled through its church and that Lee Man-hee has received divine revelation to interpret it.]

See also In Tiny Solitary Cell: Irreversible Harm Caused

See also Religious Freedom Threat: China-Led Alliance

See also Gingrich Warns Against State Control of Faith

See also Domino Effect of Religious Persecution in Asia

See also Unificationism, Industry, and Cold War Survival

See also Current Korean Situation: Context and Key Issues

See also Court: Prosecutors’ Overreach in Politicized Case

See also Unificationism Emerging as a World Religion

See also Alarm Over State Interference in Religion

Related to “church closure act”: Mother Han’s December Trial: Long Detention Ahead

Also related to “church closure act”: A 10-Minute Visit to Mother Han in Detention

Also related to “church closure act”: Denying Allegations: Hak Ja Han (82) in Inquiry

Also related to “church closure act”: SKorean Court’s Sharp Criticism of Prosecutors

And also related to “church closure act”: Detention: Harsh Cell Conditions Spark Outcry

More, related to “church closure act”: Ugly: Arrest Warrant Sought for Hak Ja Han (82)

And more, related to “church closure act”: Critics Warn of “Authoritarian Drift” in SKorea

Even more, related to “church closure act”: Court Decision to Prolong Detention Condemned

Still more, related to “church closure act”: Co-Founder, 82, Questioned 9 Hours by Prosecutors

Also related to “church closure act”: Democratic Party’s Assault on Family Federation

And even more, related to “church closure act”: Mother Han (82) in Poor Health in Damp, Cold Cell

And still more, related to “church closure act”: Korean Crisis: “True Democracy Must Serve Heaven”

And yet more, related to “church closure act”: Faith Leaders Protest State Assault on Religion

And more, related to “church closure act”: Trump Raises Alarm Over Church Raids in Korea

Even more, related to “church closure act”: Mike Pompeo Calls Probe of Co-Founder “Lawfare”

Still more, related to “church closure act”:  Korean Faith Crackdown: USA Urged to Confront It

Yet more, related to “church closure act”: Korean Bribery Scandal: Media Clears Federation

And also related to “church closure act”: Raids Blur Line Between Justice and Politics

More, related to “church closure act”: Heavy-Handed Raid on Sacred Sites Condemned