Regulation on Religious Organizations
Liu Peng, 2012-7-6 10:37:02
There are more than 100 million religious followers in China today, so it is obvious that the existence of religion in
Chinese society today is an objective reality. In recent years, the influence of religion has expanded and the number
of religious followers has increased. At a speech to celebrate the New Year in 2007, General Secretary Hu Jintao
called for the proper management of the five religions in China. The report of the Seventeenth National Congress of
the Chinese Communist Party emphasized the promotion of harmonious relations between religions, the positive
role of religious personnel in society, and the participation of believers in promoting economic and social
development. The role and status of religion in Chinese society has received great attention from the Party and
government.
At the same time, although people’s understanding of religion has changed and the evaluation of the social function
of religion has taken a more positive turn, religions faces many internal problems that need to be resolved. For
instance, Buddhism and Taoism have problems with internal management and development. Protestantism and
Catholicism have problems with unregistered house churches and underground churches. Lamaism and Islam have
to struggle against religious extremism and secessionism. Traditional folk religions and beliefs have problems with
identity and norms.
These problems have different natures and different origins and they fall into different categories. Nevertheless, we
must analyze these problems and find solutions. From the government’s viewpoint, these are problems of the state
regulation of religions (religious organizations).
Part I: Rule of Law Must Be Improved for Religious Regulation
When talking about regulation, the first thing we need to do is clarify the objective of regulation. In China, the
number of religious followers has increased and the influence of religion has expanded. However, the percentage of
religious followers in relation to the overall population is still small. So a question objectively exists in Chinese society:
Can the religious rights of a minority of the people be respected and protected? If we do not acknowledge the
question, we will not be able to find the proper position for religion in China. Religious freedom is a basic right that is
stipulated in the Chinese Constitution and protected by law. Grasping this reality is necessary for us to understand
and manage religious issues. We cannot talk about promoting harmonious relations between religions without this
pre-condition. Therefore, no matter how many internal problems exist within religions in China, we must adhere to
the Party’s policy of religious freedom, which is important and necessary to protect the religious freedom of citizens,
maintain ethnic unity and preserve social stability. Religious organizations need regulation; however, the objective of
the regulation must be to better implement the Party’s policy of religious freedom, protect the rights of citizens,
promote harmonious relations between religions, and restructure the relationship between the state and religion.
Otherwise religious regulations might simply become restrictions that the powerful government puts on the rights of
the weak party (religious followers and organizations). Without the correct objective, religious regulation becomes
meaningless and cannot resolve any problems. Since the establishment of the People’s Republic of China, China has
learned many lessons regarding the treatment of religious issues. Historical experiences have shown that to manage
state-religion relations well, we should not deviate from the Party’s policy of religious freedom and from the reality
that religion will exist for a long time and the number of religious followers will increase. Any regulation is futile
without the spontaneous participation and active support from religious followers and organizations. The key to
winning support from religious followers and organizations is in the objective of the religious regulation.
Once the objectives of regulation have been clarified, we then face the question of who has the authority to
regulate and how it will be done. Religion exists in every country. Every country faces the issue of regulating religious
affairs; however, the methods of regulating religion vary greatly. We must pursue a regulatory system that is based
1
on protecting the religious freedom of citizens. The regulatory system should be cost-efficient. It should promote
harmonious relationships between religions, promote social stability, and benefit the state, religion and society.
What is this system? It is the rule of law. We should use laws, not administrative measures, to manage religious
issues.
At present, the government at various levels in China has departments to manage religious affairs. The regulation of
religious affairs is conducted mostly by administrative organs through administrative measures. Is this method
effective and reasonable? This question deserves our serious consideration. The fact is that in recent decades,
religious affairs departments at various levels have made great efforts, but religious problems have not decreased or
vanish, and some religious problems have even become more serious. Should the government continue the existing
regulatory system and strengthen the regulation of religious organizations further? Should the government have
more control over the personnel, finances, activities and venues of religious organizations? Should the government
promulgate more and further detailed regulations concerning religious affairs? The answer is obviously no. Religions
develop and religious followers conduct religious activities. This is the normal experience in human society and the
normal right of religious followers and organizations in modern civilized nations. The government says that it wants
to protect religious freedom of citizen’s, promote harmonious relations between religions, and bring into play the
positive role of religious organizations and believers in society. Consequently it is necessary to regulate religious
organizations. However, the regulations should be in accordance with the law and should serve the public.
If the activities and actions of religious organizations and religious followers involve public interests and the interest
of other people and other organizations, laws should be the only basis to manage any conflicts that may arise. Illegal
activities should be punished according to the law. Law is the best means of managing manage the relations
between religions, between religion and the non-religious, and between religion and the state. Relying on laws to
resolve conflicts and problems and to protect the common interests of the state and society is mark of a civilized
society and indicates that a country is governed according to the rule of law.
Therefore, if someone uses religion to conduct activities that go beyond the rights of the religious organizations and
followers and damages the interests of other people and the society, we should improve laws to resolve these
problems, instead of strengthening the government power and using administrative measures to resolve them. If
religious organizations and followers have done nothing illegal, their rights to have and practice their religious belief
should be protected by the law. No matter if there is violation of law in the religious sphere; the state should not
deviate from the rule of law in managing religious affairs.
At present, we still do not have a comprehensive religious law which has been ratified by the National People’s
Congress and can be used in judicial practice. Article 36 in the Chinese Constitution is the stipulation regarding
religion. However, the Constitution cannot be cited in a trial in China. Below the Constitution, there are the
Regulations on Religious Affairs issued by the State Council. In the legal hierarchy, this document is beneath the laws
ratified by the National People’s Congress. It should not be a replacement for laws to manage religious belief, which
is a basic right of citizens. Beneath this document there are local regulations and rules, but they cannot replace laws.
Therefore, in order to regulate religious affairs in accordance with the law, we should first of all have laws and
improve the rule of law. We should enact a Religious Law. Only then can we manage religious issues according to a
legal basis and state regulation can achieve the consent of the society. Of course, as we have discussed, a Religious
Law should be enacted in order to protect the religious freedom of citizens, guarantee social harmony, promote
harmonious religious relations, as well as regulate and manage the relationship between religions and the state,
society and individuals. We should not make a Religious Regulation Law which purely reflects the interests of the
administrative organs. In making a Religious Law, we should follow the requirements of legal legislation, follow the
principle of democratic and scientific legislation, and solicit opinions from the society.
Part II: Strengthening Internal Management is the Key to Religious Regulation
2
We do not have a Religious Law at present so how should we regulate religious organizations? On the one hand, I
believe that we should follow the existing laws to externally manage the relationship between society and religion.
On the other hand, establishing and strengthening the internal management system of religious organizations should
also be an essential goal of religious regulation.
To establish and strengthen the internal management system of religious organizations means that all religious
organizations should have effective internal supervision and a system of checks-and-balances that are in keeping
with their religious doctrines. At present, the major problem in the internal governance of religious organizations is
not the absence of rules. The problem is that the rules are merely nominal and there is no effective system of
checks-and-balances in which decision-making, executive, and supervisory powers are separated. The leaders of
many religious organizations or religious venues have highly concentrated power yet lack supervision. They have
absolute power within their religious organization or venues. Their power is not monitored and, there is no
separation of decision-making, executive and supervisory powers. In fact, people are greatly dissatisfied not just with
management, but with management that lacks supervision and constraint. If the power over personnel, finance, and
religious affairs in religious organization or religious venues is unchecked, churches and temples might become the
private domain and enterprise of the leaders of the churches and temples. Enterprises are subject to the supervision
of the Ministry of Industry and Commerce, the Taxation Bureau and the Central Bank, and their finances must follow
state regulations. Non-profit organizations are subject to the supervision of a professional leading unit and the Civil
affairs Ministry in accordance with the law. However, religious organizations are not enterprises. They are not
subject to the supervision of the Ministry of Industry and Commerce or the Taxation Bureau. They are also different
from ordinary mass organizations and financial persons in that they do not have a clear supervisory organ. The only
organs that can supervise religious organizations are the religious affairs departments of the government. But the
relationship between the religious affairs departments and religious organizations is not like the subordinate
relationship between government organs and ordinary organizations. If we totally rely on the religious affairs
departments to manage the personnel, finance and religious affairs in religious organizations or venues, then
religious organizations and venues simply become state-operated enterprises. This is a serious violation of the
principle of separation of state and religion. Historical experience teaches us that this method does not work.
The government should not interfere with the internal affairs of religious organizations. Who can become an abbot
or a bishop? What kind of temples and churches can be built? How much money can be spent for what kind of
activities? These questions should be autonomously decided by religious organizations, not by the government. If a
religious organization registers as mass organization or legal person, the government can use laws for ordinary
organizations as an external constraint for religious organizations. If the legal stipulation for legal persons does not
reflect the characteristics of religious organizations, the state should consider setting up a special registration system
for religious legal persons to distinguish religious organizations from ordinary organizations. However, within
religious organizations, religious leaders would be able to exercise religious disciplines and rules. They must establish
a management system with the separation of decision-making, executive and supervisory powers over the personnel,
finance and activities of religious organization and venues.
Part III: Open a Religious Market and Improve Management through Competition
Since we already have temple management committees and patriotic committees, the internal management of
religious organizations should have been resolved. Why hasn't the issue been resolved? Why is there still no
institutional arrangement for decision-making power, executive power and in particular supervisory power within
religions?
The reason is that the current religious organizations do not need to be accountable to religious followers or to the
higher organs. Religious organizations and venues are supervised by religious affairs departments. If the leaders of
religious organization or venues have good relations with the religious affairs department which directly supervises
religious organizations or venues, everything will be fine. Religious affairs departments can politically evaluate and
3
judge religious organizations, venues and staff. No other government organs or religious followers can change the
evaluation results. Similarly, in the past, the managers of the state-operated enterprises needed to be responsible
only to their upper level organs. In religious organizations or venues, nobody below the leaders can supervise the
leaders.
The situation is simply a copy of the typical state-operated enterprises during the era of a centrally planned economy.
Since the reform and opening-up, China has transitioned from being a centrally planned economy to a market
economy. The state has abandoned the direct management of ordinary enterprises. This new regulatory system uses
the market as its orientation, competition as a means, and law as a guarantee. It uses government policies to
conduct macro level adjustment. Enterprises no longer rely on the upper level organs for funds, personnel and
facilities. They strengthen themselves through competition in the marketplace. They embark on a healthy and
reasonable road for development.
Religious organizations are different from enterprises but their rationale is identical. Whether a religion can survive,
develop, or receive popular support should be tested in a religious market and decided by religious followers. If a
religion, a sect, or religious worker is loved by religious followers, other religious organizations in the region will
shrink or even vanish. In contrast, if a religion, a sect or a religious venue cannot sustain its operation, this
demonstrates that the religion, sect or religious venue does not fit the needs of society and their disappearance is
reasonable. In the long run, in a certain scope (a country, province or a county), the demand for religions follows
certain rules. It is impossible to outlaw the existence of religions. However, too many religious organizations or
venues are not sustainable. What kind of religions and religious venues can develop should not be decided by the
government or individuals, but should be decided by the religious market. In order to survive, religious organizations
should rely on competition and be tested by religious followers. If the religious market is open, people have to win
by providing better religious services in competition. Religious organizations and venues would be eliminated if they
cannot fit with the society, have chaotic internal administration and too many scandals, or cannot win the support
from the religious followers.
To guarantee the orderly competition within the free religious market, the government should resolutely stop
providing any political or financial support to any religious organization in any form. Meanwhile, it should improve
laws relevant to religious affairs. All religious organizations that legally operate within the legal framework should be
protected by law and their internal personnel, finance and religious affairs should not be interfered with by the
government. All religious organizations or individuals that violate the law should be punished according to the law. A
religious organization should rely on itself for survival. Consequently it will face great pressure for survival. In order
to survive, it must compete. In order to win in competition, it has to follow the law; otherwise it will be punished
according to the law. Consequently religions, sects and religious venues have to strengthen internal administration
and upgrade their competitiveness in the religious market. Based on the demand in the religious market, religious
organizations will become more self-disciplined and use the best activities to prove the value of their existence. The
outcome of the competition in a legal scope will certainly benefit the whole society. This approach is the
fundamental way to resolve issues in the regulations on religious affairs.
Part IV: Conclusions
Protecting the religious freedom of citizens should be the fundamental objective of religious regulation. Regulation
should be done in accordance with the law. We should speed up the enacting of legislation for religious affairs. The
essential task in the management of religious organizations is the establishment of internal management
mechanisms with the separation of decision-making, executive and supervisory powers. To provide incentives for
religious organizations to improve their internal administration, we should allow religious organizations to enter the
religious market. Elimination and/or survival would be determined on the basis of competition. Based on the rule of
law, we should open the religious market. We should provide maximum motivation for religious organizations to
4
spontaneously contribute to society, and to exercise internal self-discipline and autonomy. This approach is the most
fundamental way to resolve problems in the internal management of religious organizations.
Speech at the Academic Symposium “Religion and Rule of Law: Management of Religious Organizations” in
Chongqing Municipality in 2007.
中文：《关于宗教组织的管理问题》 刘澎 2007-12-18
http://www.pacilution.com/english/ShowArticle.asp?ArticleID=3116
5