Silencing the Churches: Why Korea’s New Rhetoric Threatens Democratic Freedom

BITTER — HOME ABOUT CHINA v FROM THE WORLD v INTERVIEWS DOCUMENTS AND TRANSLATIONS v ABOUT EDITORIAL BOARD TOPICS p WINTER

You are here: Home » From the World » News Global search

Silencing the Churches: Why Korea’s N EWSLETTER New Rhetoric Threatens Democratic Freedom Email address:

by Massimo lntrovigne I Jan 23, 2026 I News Global Your email address • In his New Year’s message, President Lee promised to “root out” religious involvement in Mil politics, targeting the Unification Church, Shincheonji, ancf conservative Protestant SUPPORT BITTER WINTER churches. by Massimo tntrovigne

( Donate:} = … i::?J ~ .~ !:!~

LEGAL Privacy Policy

President Lee during the New Year’s Press Conference. Screenshot.

South Korea’s Presidential New Year’s message should have brought people together. Instead, President LeeJae-myung used his January 21 press conference to issue a sweeping condemnation of religious involvement in public life. He warned th at “religious interference in politics” leads to “national downfall,” likening it to armed rebellion, and promised stricter laws to eliminate it ‘’The current level of punishment seems far too weak,” he said, alluding to law proposals allowing for the swift dissolution of religious organizations that violate the electoral law.

He urged the use of the current investigation into the Unification Church and Shincheonji, two groups against which he called on all political parties to rally, as an “opportun ity’’ to “root out” religious involvement in politics entirely.

President Lee claimed that Protestant churches “once did not intervene in politics,” a statement that contradicts the entire history of Korean Protestant activism, from the March 1st anti-Japanese Movement to the fight against dictatorship. He said that “there has been debate whether some Protestant churches should be investigated too. Well, lega l boundaries remain unclear for now, but certain churches will be investigated if necessary.” He also referenced unnamed pastors who supposedly preached that “President Lee should die… we should kill him.”

The reference was to Pastor Son Hyun-bo, currently in jail in Busan for alleged violations of the electoral law. Yet the sermon’s passage in question- promptly released by his son and supporters on X-reveals a different story. Before Lee became president, Pastor Son declared, “Lee Jae-myung must die; I mean his greediness, his hostility, and his selfishness must die.” This was typical hyperbolic language from fire and brimstone preaching, not a call for violence. To interpret metaphor as a threat is to criminalize religious expression itself.

Massimo lntrovigne with Chance Son, the son of Pastor Son Hyun-Bo.

Democracy cannot function if the state has the power to reinterpret religious speech most negatively whenever it intersects with politics. Nor can it function if the government decides which religions are “acceptable” in public life. Yet this is the direction indicated by the current rhetoric-especially when paired with the ongoing demonization of Shincheonji and the Unification Church (now called the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification), along with the unjust, harsh detention of Mother Han, the Family Federation’s 82-yea r-old leader who is revered as the Mother of Peace by thousands worldwide.

If individual religious figures have committed bribery or other crimes, they should face prosecution-as individuals, based on evidence. However, the wrongdoing of individuals does not strip entire religious communities of their rights. It certainly does not j ustify treating enti re movements as political threats.

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is clear. Article 25 guarantees every citizen the right to engage in public affairs without discrimination-including discrimination based on religion. Article 18 protects the right to express one’s beliefs publicly. These protections cover Catholics, Protestants, Buddhists, Muslims, and yes, Shincheonj i and the Unification Church. The viewpoint of some religious supporters of the ruling party that these groups are “heretical” is irrelevant in a democracy. The state should not enforce religious doctrines.

Unjustly detained: Family Federation’s Mother Han.

Across the democratic world, religious communit ies engage in politics. American churches mobilize on issues ranging from abortion to immigration. European Christian Democratic parties are built on expl icit religious social teachings. Israel’s religious part ies are crucial in its parliamentary system. People may disagree with their positions, but their participation is both legitimate and protected.

South Ko rea is no different. It should not be.

This protection applies not only to the majority faiths or widely accepted denominations. It encompasses all religious communities, including those that some might find controversial or unfamiliar. Theological disagreements or accusations of”heresy’’ shou ld not determine who can participate in publ ic life. A democracy that allows the state or its favored rel igious groups to decide which faiths are “acceptable” has already abandoned neutrality.

The principle of separating church and state exists to prevent the government f rom imposing a religion or suppressing one. It is meant to protect conscience, not to serve political interests. When a government begins to talk about “uprooting’’ religious influence, “investigating’’ churches for unclear reasons, or “strengthening punishments” for vague political involvement, t he line between constitutional principle and ideological enforcement becomes dangerously thin.

This is not the separation of chu rch and state. This is the state punishing religions it disapproves of.

South Ko rea is a vibrant democracy with a proud history of civic activism inspired by religion. That history should not be misrepresented as a threat. A confident democracy does not fear sermons, believers, or the polit ical involvement of communities with differing beliefs. It should fear the temptation- often subtle at fi rst- to redefine constitutional principles in ways that si lence uncomfortable voices.

President Lee’s comments deserve careful, principled examination. The issue is not wheth er religious groups should follow the law; they must. The problem is whether the law will be changed to criminalize religious participation, especially for groups that are unpopular or t heological ly unfavored.

If t hat occurs, it will not protect democracy. It will destroy it.

Religious Liberty, Shincheonji, South Korea, Unification Church

llll M assimo lntrovig ne Massimo lntrovigne (born June 14, 1955 in Rome) is an

- 1ra11an soc101og1sr or re11g1ons. He 1s me rounaer ana managing director of the Center for Studies on New Religions (CESNUR), an international network of scholars who study new religious movements. lntrovigne is the author of some 70 books and more than 100 articles in the field of sociology of religion. He was the main author of the Enciclopedia de/le religioni in Italia (Encyclopedia of Religions in Italy). He is a member of the editorial board for the lnterdisciQlinary 1ournal of Research on Religion and of the executive board of University of Ca lifornia Press· Nova Relig[Q. From January 5 to December 31, 201 1, he has served as the “Representative on combating racism, xenophobia and discrimination, with a special focus on discrimination against Christians and members of other religions” of the Organization for Secu rity and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). From 2012 to 2015 he served as chairperson of the Observatory of Religious Liberty, instituted by the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs in order to monitor problems of religious liberty on a worldwide scale.

~ ~ ~ 4-fv) ,_.;;;;:;;d ._!…!’;i •••:’’

The ARO PL Teen Member High Cou rt of Tanzania: Pakistan, Memorizing the Murdered in Kenya: Justice State Cannot Compel All Quran Is Now a Crime for Delayed, Justice Denied Muslims to Join an the Ahmad is “Umbrel la Organization” Jan 16, 2026 Jan 2, 2026 Jan 8, 2026