Dissolving Religious Corporations in Japan: Constitutional Problems. 1. Religion and Politics: Conflicts and Collusions

A report submitted to the Tokyo High Court, where the Unification Church appeal is pending, by a renowned legal scholar, professor emeritus at Keio University.

By Setsu Kobayashi

July 17, 2025

Article 1 of 5. Note: We have kept the system of references of the Japanese original.

Émile Durkheim (1858–1917). From X.

Religion is always present in human society

As it is said, “there has been no known society that has ever existed without religion” (É. Durkheim, “Les Formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse,” 1912, p. 33); humans and religion are inseparable.

Unlike other living beings, humans have intelligence; therefore, they can discover causal relationships in the phenomena that occur in this world. They have used this intelligence to improve civilization. At the same time, there are still many things in this world that are unknown, and this is why intelligent human beings recognize their imperfections and seek a perfect and absolute existence, which is the polar opposite of that. In addition, unlike other living organisms, human beings have a sense of ethics, or conscience, which causes them to reflect on their nature. They sometimes pursue their interests excessively, even though they know it is immoral, and yearn for absolute good. This is the world of religion. And religion gives those who believe in it confidence and meaning in life.

In that sense, as Feuerbach pointed out, “religion is nothing but the product of the human instinct to seek happiness” (see Hideo Kishimoto, “Religious Studies,” p. III).

Man is a political animal

On the other hand, politics is also indispensable in human life.

Humans live each day fulfilling their desires, but society’s benefits are limited. However, we have infinite desires, and humans are both ethical and immoral. This is why human beings have devised mechanisms such as the state and law to adjust citizens’ interests and carry out “politics” that aims, as a whole, for the greatest happiness of the greatest number of people.

As Aristotle once pointed out, “Man is by nature a political animal’ (see Michitaro Tanaka, ed., “World Masterpieces. 8: Aristotle,” pp. 68–9)

Aristotle (384–322 BCE). Roman copy of a Greek bronze original by Lysippos (390–300 BCE). Credits.

The essential contradiction between politics and religion

Religion and politics, both unavoidable aspects of human life, intersect in daily experiences.

However, the critical point here is that politics and religion are essentially incompatible. In other words, politics is essentially an “adjustment” of interests, and there is no such thing as “absolute good.” However, religion presupposes the existence of an absolute good.

Therefore, as historical experience has shown (see, e.g., “Everson v. Board of Education of Township of Ewing,” 330 U.S. 1, 8–13 [1947], etc.), when politics and religion “collude,” tragedy occurs. In other words, political power holders who are aligned with religion and able to claim to be “certain to be oriented toward absolute good” no longer have any reason to follow the “relative good chosen by majority vote” of the people. This is when political power holders begin to ignore the people’s will, leading to tyranny.

As for religion, since it deals with areas where objective proof is essentially impossible, it should be propagated solely through the sincere actions of its followers and the persuasive power of its doctrines (see Giannella, “Religious Liberty, Nonestablishment, and Doctrinal Development: Part II. The Nonestablishment Principle,” Harv. L. Rev. 513 [1963]). However, when religion becomes colluded with state power, it can easily come to use the power of the state to proselytize. From a human perspective, this is natural, but this is no longer religion; it is politics.

In this way, when politics and religion are colluding and each allows the other to become “corrupt,” there will be no democracy or freedom of religion.

The need for the separation of church and state

Therefore, it becomes necessary to maintain a reasonable distance between political power and religion, in other words, to draw a reasonable “line” in the relationship between the two.

The principle of separation of church and state is the standard for this line; a wisdom derived from historical human rights struggles. Despite the failures in Europe, America was founded by Puritans fleeing the oppression of heretics brought about by the collusion between church and state in England. The constitutional principle of America, which was established after more than two hundred years of trial and error, serves as a reference for other liberal democracies. This is the so-called “Lemon” test (“Lemon v. Kurtzman,” 403 U.S. 602 [1971]).

The U.S. Supreme Court. Credits.

When political power interacts with religion—such as when the government officially supports or prohibits a specific religious group—it is considered unconstitutional if the government’s “purpose” or “effect” is to “promote” or “suppress that religion.

In essence, this is a constitutional requirement that political power and religion each abide by their own rules and that “the neutrality of public power toward religious activity must be maintained.”

However, it is an unshakable premise that “A party’s religious belief cannot be accepted as a justification for his committing an overt act, made criminal by the law of the land.”

(“Reynolds v. United States,” 98 U.S.145 (1878), etc.). This indicates that the constitutional principle of separation between church and state, which ensures that political power does not interfere with religious activities, applies unless the action is a crime.

Source: bitterwinter.org