To mark the 80th anniversary of liberation and division, the 7th North Korean Church Planting Forum was held to review the Korean church’s readiness and direction for unified mission work and the planting of churches in North Korea, and to refine strategies.

Under the theme “80th Anniversary of Liberation: Diagnosis and Vision for North Korean Church Planting,” the forum was held on July 17 at the Cappella Hall in the basement of the Second General Building of Chongshin University in Dongjak-gu, Seoul.

It was co-organized by the Presbyterian Church in Korea (Hapdong) Institute for Unity and Mission Development, the Hapdong Presbytery Network’s Northwest Region North Korean Mission Committee, and the Unification Hope Mission Society. Ten organizations connected to unification mission and North Korean mission, including the Christian Unification Studies Association, the North Korean Church Research Institute, the Mission Uniting Korea Council, the Sungsil University Christian Unification Leadership Center, Jubilee Unification Prayer Network, Chongshin University Graduate School of Unification Development, and the Unification Ministry Pastors’ Association, co-hosted the event.

“Rebuilding the North Korean Church Must Follow God’s Plan and Rely on the Power of the Holy Spirit”

At the first session’s worship service, moderated by Elder Pastor Cho Young-gi, secretary of the Institute for Unity and Mission Development, the Ruth Trio from the Northwest Region North Korean Mission Committee sang a special song after the scripture reading by Rev. Hong Seung-young, deputy director of the Institute. Then, the institute’s director, Pastor Kim Chan-gon—who also serves as chairman of the Korean Church Unification Mission Denominational Council—preached a sermon titled “Two Principles” (Mark 6:7–9).

Pastor Kim stated, “Unification is everyone’s desire, and rebuilding the North Korean church is our shared vision,” adding, “For unification to become the incredible blessing God intends, we must align our actions with God’s will. The first principle is ‘team mission,’ and the second principle is ‘faith mission.’”

He continued, “Whether during the course of unification or after it is achieved, we must never abandon the principle of teamwork. Also, without relying heavily on money, we must steadfastly look to God and hold onto faith.” He prayed that “with these two principles, we may present a unified model of unification mission to the Korean church and together create a beautiful history.”

After the closing prayer by Rev. Yoon Young-min, chairman of the North Korean Mission Committee, remarks were given by Rev. Jung Young-gi, chair of the Northwest Presbytery Council, followed by greetings from Prof. Ha Chung-yeop of Sungsil University, chairman of the Unification Hope Mission Society, and announcements by Rev. On Sung-do, its secretary-general.

Rev. Jung said, “All who desire unification and the rebuilding of the North Korean church must pray for the collapse of the Kim Il-sung statue erected at Jangdaehyeon Church site and for the fire of the Holy Spirit that once burned there to return.” He added, “When the Holy Spirit descended upon Jangdaehyeon Church, a spiritual explosion occurred decisively. I believe the decisive power for rebuilding the North Korean church also comes from the power of the Spirit.” “When we gather there in repentance and prayer, the church will be rebuilt, walls of division torn down, and a remarkable revival will be reborn,” he said.

Prof. Ha explained, “In a month we will commemorate the 80th anniversary of liberation on August 15, 1945. In addition, on September 9, 1958, North Korea enacted a law to abolish all religions and 3,089 churches in the North, liquidating pastors and elders—most were executed—and purged believers, forcibly deporting them to remote mountainous regions in Yanggang and North Hamgyong Provinces.”

He continued: “This gathering marks a historic turning point on the 80th anniversary of liberation, serving as an opportunity to theologically and strategically explore the restoration of the North Korean church that collapsed after liberation. Convened by the Hapdong denomination and others, it is a forum to review denominational-level unification mission and church-planting strategies and to propose direction,” and he added, “The Unification Hope Mission Society hopes that, in the not-too-distant future, the season of Christ will come to North Korea, with North Korean brothers and sisters gathering in numerous churches—from cities to rural and island regions—and worshipping.”

“North Korean Mission and Church Planting Call for Theological and Missional Shift Beyond Political Sentiment and Ideological Conflict”

In the second session, Chungshin University history education professor Hong Moon-gi presented on “80 Years Since Liberation: Diagnosis of North Korean Church Planting.” He said, “As we mark 80 years since liberation, there is a growing need to reflect and reestablish the direction of North Korean church planting from world-historical, Korean-historical, and church-historical perspectives.” He noted that since the 2008 global financial crisis, the term “new normal” gained currency, as the world shifted from a U.S.-centered liberal order to a multipolar era. He observed that Korean society is now confronting political polarization and the politicization of the church.

Prof. Hong stated, “North Korean mission and church planting must not be approached with simple desires for unification or nationalistic sentiment. Instead, the changed era demands theological and missional transformation that discern and act on God’s will anew.” He raised several questions, including whether North Korean defector ministry represents outreach to fellow nationals or multicultural engagement, whether the rise of the Jangmadang generation is opportunity or crisis, and whether North Korean human rights activism can coexist with mission.

On defector ministry, he called for a shift “‘from multiculturalism,’ which acknowledges cultural diversity within one nation based on freedom and rights, to an ‘interculturalist perspective,’ which emphasizes mutual relationship, communication, and the possibility of change and integration.” He added, “Rather than instrumentalizing defectors as part of a unified national identity, we must recognize their autonomous identities and journey together with an interculturalist approach.”

Regarding the Jangmadang generation—who survived via market economies during the 1990s “Arduous March”—he cautioned, “The gospel opportunity presented by the Jangmadang generation must not appeal to economic desire but to the gospel’s essence, communal life, and humble service.”

On North Korean human rights activism and mission, he argued that it “should be reframed not as an ideological tool but as a means to realize God’s justice and love.” He emphasized that “a crucial principle in North Korean mission and church planting is that ‘the North Korean church belongs to North Korean residents, and their confessions of faith must come from their own encounters with God.’” He concluded that if conflicts arise post-unification between the Korean Christian Federation and underground churches, North Korean believers themselves “must, within God, discern and determine church governance and discipline.”

He called for North Korean church-planting efforts to be “re-prepared not as simple passion or idealism, but as holy resolve toward restoring God’s kingdom,” and urged looking at North Korea with “God’s heart, not political sentiment; gospel light, not ideological strife.”

During discussion, North Korean Church Research Institute director Rev. Yoo Gwan-ji said, “We’ve become accustomed to thinking and preparing for North Korean church planting from inside the church. This presentation gave me the insight to consider this issue from outside the church and in connection with domestic and international issues.”

“Rebuilding North Korean Churches Demands Stopping Inertial Practices and Reflective Review”

Rev. Lee Soo-bong, research director of the Institute for Unity and Mission Development, presented on “Transformation of Korean Church’s Role in North Korean Church Rebuilding and Denominations’ Responsibility,” offering candid and reflective analysis. He identified areas needing critical review: using anti-communist sentiment and unification longing as default justification; supporting reconstruction because émigré vow it; projecting South Korea’s church-building enthusiasm onto North Korea; lack of objective assessment of why churches collapsed; assigning reconstruction by quotas among denominations causing competitive drawbacks; focusing on avoiding side effects over theological reflection; equating person-building with physical buildings; implementing projects without centering North Korean believers; using “reconstruction” without precise intent while administrative reorganization has erased location traces. He argued that “historical and missiological meaning of North Korean church rebuilding demands we stop inertial practices and critically reexamine.”

He also introduced perspectives of institutions, history of church collapse and rebuilding, and denominational efforts, proposing preferable directions: redefine reconstruction for the present era; objectively document events, victims, perpetrators with healing and restoration; derive contemporary understanding and future lessons; approach from church-historical, missiological, organizational theological viewpoints; understand collapse and revival of faith; center on North Korean believers; account for post-unification complexities involving other religions, groups, NGOs, governments, and international missions; study church roles in reunified society; develop mission strategies aligned to post-unification North Korean social needs; organically coordinate churches, presbyteries, denominations, clergy, defectors, missionaries, social development experts, welfare workers, athletes, cultural workers, media, and IT experts; cultivate courage to forsake old priorities, understand and devise new strategies, and implement them.

Here is the continuation and completion of the English translation:

“Need a Centralized ‘Control Tower’ for North Korean Church Rebuilding but Cautious of Risks”

Rev. Lee Soo-bong, research director at the Institute for Unity and Mission Development, addressed the necessity and potential pitfalls of establishing a nationwide control center for rebuilding North Korean churches. He stated that while such a “control tower” might seem essential, it also carries risks. “The control tower isn’t meant to generate policies or energy but to coordinate,” he said, explaining that policy-making and momentum should originate from denominations and local churches. Regional presbyteries act as intermediaries, and denominational alliances represent the Korean church to government, society, other religions, and NGOs, taking on a coordinating and protective role.

He also emphasized the role of North Korean defectors, describing them as one of several key stakeholders. “We must rationally allocate roles among stakeholders to minimize unintended consequences,” he said, arguing that from a “game theory” perspective, all members must organically unite to rebuild the North Korean church.

During discussion, Rev. Kim Jae-ho of the Unification Ministry Pastors’ Association noted the complexity of Lee’s “10 proposals,” calling them weighty and difficult to unravel. He appreciated the multi-perspective approach to North Korean mission and denominational progress, saying it would be valuable for ministry practitioners. He also urged concrete denomination-level roles to address the collapse of North Korean churches—“a case involving the North Korean government as perpetrator and victims within the church”—and strategies to maintain momentum amid regional tension and declining defector outflows.

“What Are the Three Phases of North Korean Church Planting by Period and Regional Strategies?”

Prof. Ha Kwang-min of Chungshin University’s Graduate School of Unification Development presented phased scenarios and strategic models for church planting—from the current situation through openness and post-unification—drawing comparisons with German reunification.

He argued that mission-focused ecclesiology is essential because in North Korea’s unique context, the church should act as a catalyst for social transformation. Given North Korea’s closed nature and rigidity, he said the church must fulfill roles in spiritual ministry and social healing and unity, stressing the need for contextualizing worldview, culture, and politics, and incorporating soteriology, eschatology, and pneumatology into mission strategies.

He outlined three phases:

1. Current situation (preparation phase): train mission personnel through defector churches, broadcast and media missions to North Korea, and select planting areas in South Korean churches.
2. Opening phase (contact phase): initiate church ministry via humanitarian aid, launch limited missions amid expanding religious freedom.
3. Post-unification (main planting phase): after a “hard landing,” implement a “soft landing” period and prepare church planters and lay expert teams; in unified Korea, systematically plant churches modeled on German reunification.

He also offered regional strategies:

• Pyongyang and major cities: treat them as joint mission zones managed by a unified Korean mission coalition.
• Major provincial cities: leverage defectors with local ties for planting.
• West Coast line (Haeju, Sariwon, Nampo, Pyongsong, Sinuiju): focus on local residents or business-as-mission (BAM); in Sinuiju possibly develop multi-ethnic churches including Chinese.
• East Coast line (Wonsan, Hamhung, Dancheon, Kimchaek, Orang, Chongjin, Rason): prepare for trade and tourism growth, tailor planting accordingly; Rason could host multi-ethnic international churches (Russia, China, North Korea).
• Rural areas: engage via agricultural cooperatives and community facilities, considering seasonal rhythms.
• Border regions (Onsong, Namyang, Hoeryong, Musan, Daehongdan, Hyesan, Manpo): consider ethnic Korean-Chinese congregations, family reunification ministries with defectors, and churches tied to cross-border trade.

Prof. Ha presented two planting models:

• Independent plant model: start autonomous local churches from the outset.
• Mother-daughter church model: South Korean churches lead until North Korean congregations mature spiritually and financially.

He advocated for an autonomous, culturally contextual church by North Koreans themselves, emphasizing that this is the most natural and culturally appropriate form.

He also pointed to recent trends—greater external information flows and growing defector populations—suggesting a window for mission. He stated that defector churches in the South now function as “nursery beds” for future North Korean churches.

Prof. Ha argued that planting initiatives must be long-term—beyond reconstruction post-unification—and shaped by lessons from Germany’s reunification, including cultural and psychological rifts, and integration challenges, which hold vital insights for the Korean context.

He stressed that strategies must be grounded in deep understanding of North Korea’s religious environment and Juche ideology, improve North Koreans’ perception of Christianity, and emphasize Spirit-led, self-sustaining, culturally rooted churches. While local ownership is ideal, sustained support and mission by the Korean church is essential.

Finally, he highlighted the central role of defector churches, saying they carry North Korean cultural insights, and the South Korean church must partner with them to develop concrete mission strategies and meaningful partnerships.

He concluded: “Church planting in North Korea is not merely a religious task but a major effort to contribute to peace, reunification and social integration on the peninsula.” He insisted that even amid complex security dilemmas, the Korean church must pursue a future-oriented role grounded in love and understanding of North Koreans.

Mutual Partnership Inside the Korean Church

Rev. Heo Eun-sung of Ansan Dongsan Church’s Korea Peninsula Mission Team emphasized the need for establishing defector worship communities within southern churches and collaborative partnerships between defector churches and established churches engaged in planting churches in North Korea. Such mutual nurturing, he said, could initiate unity within the church itself.

During Q&A, Rev. Cho Ki-yeon, head specialist at the Institute for Unity and Mission Development, observed that the questions and concerns raised signal significant progress in North Korean mission. “After nearly 40 years of North Korean mission, what we’ve learned is that it’s not our mission but God’s mission,” he said. “The work of initiating, accomplishing and bearing fruit in North Korean mission is the Spirit’s work; though it may seem slow to us, God is working in the North as He is in the South.”

Originally published by Christian Daily Korea, translated and edited by Christian Daily International staff.