China's Crackdown on Christianity: Underground Churches Destroyed

Last updated: 5 October 2026

Photo: Blue Heaven, Catholic Church - Rod Waddington

China's crackdown on Christianity, intensified since Xi Jinping's "Sinicization of Religion" policy from 2018, has produced systematic pressure on underground churches, pastor detentions, church closures, and restrictions on Christian practice. Furthermore, while state-recognised churches (Three-Self Patriotic Movement for Protestants; Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association for Catholics) operate under restrictions, underground "house churches" face raids, closure, and prosecution of leaders. As a result, Chinese Christian asylum claims continue to arise particularly from underground church members. This article documents the crackdown.[1]

Christianity in China

Christianity in China includes Protestants and Catholics. Approximate population: 90-100 million total Christians (estimates vary). State framework: Three-Self Patriotic Movement (TSPM) and China Christian Council for Protestants; Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association for Catholics. Underground Protestants ("house churches") and underground Catholics ("loyal to Rome" pre-Vatican-China deal) operate outside the state framework. Furthermore, the 2018 Sinicization policy aims to bring all religion under state control. As a result, the state-underground distinction is critical to asylum analysis. Therefore, the specific church affiliation matters substantially.[2]

Sinicization of Religion

The "Sinicization of Religion" policy, articulated by Xi Jinping from 2016 and operationalized through new Regulations on Religious Affairs (effective February 2018), requires: (1) Religions to align with CCP ideology; (2) State approval for religious activity; (3) Removal of religious symbols from public spaces; (4) Restrictions on religious education of minors; (5) Online religious activity restrictions; (6) Rewriting of religious texts. Furthermore, the policy applies to all "Five Religions" recognised in China (Protestantism, Catholicism, Buddhism, Daoism, Islam). As a result, religious freedom has been substantially curtailed. Therefore, the Sinicization framework is critical context for Christian asylum claims.[3]

House Church Raids

Major house church crackdowns: (1) Early Rain Covenant Church (Chengdu) — major raid December 2018; Pastor Wang Yi imprisoned in 2019; (2) Zion Church (Beijing) — closed 2018; (3) Living Stone Church (Guizhou) — pastor imprisoned 2017; (4) Multiple house churches raided in 2024-2026. Furthermore, the pattern includes: surveillance before raids; mass detention of members; seizure of religious materials; pressure on landlords to evict; pastor prosecution. As a result, underground church operations have become increasingly difficult. Therefore, underground Christian asylum claims have strong factual base.[4]

"Sinicization of Religion has produced the most sustained crackdown on Christianity in China since the Cultural Revolution. Underground churches face raids; pastors face imprisonment; ordinary Christians face surveillance and restriction."USCIRF China Annual Report

Pastor Wang Yi Case

The Pastor Wang Yi case illustrates the crackdown. Wang Yi, founder of Early Rain Covenant Church in Chengdu, was a prominent house church pastor and intellectual. After the December 2018 raid on his church, Wang was arrested and charged with "inciting subversion of state power" and "illegal business operations." In 2019, he was sentenced to 9 years' imprisonment. Furthermore, his case became internationally known and produced major US, UK, and EU statements. As a result, the case demonstrates the seriousness of state response to underground church leadership. Therefore, Wang Yi-type profiles particularly support asylum claims.[5]

The Vatican-China Agreement

The Vatican-China Agreement on the Appointment of Bishops (signed 2018, renewed 2020, 2022, 2024) has affected Chinese Catholics. The agreement allows: state involvement in bishop appointments; some recognition of state-registered bishops; ongoing role for Beijing in Catholic appointments. Furthermore, the agreement has been controversial — critics argue it undermines underground Catholic communities loyal to Rome. As a result, the Catholic situation is complex and contested. Therefore, Catholic asylum claims require specific analysis of pre-agreement vs post-agreement dynamics.[6]

Children and Religion

Restrictions on religious education of minors have intensified under Sinicization. (1) Children under 18 prohibited from attending church services in some regions; (2) Religious classes for minors banned; (3) Schools required to promote "atheist" education; (4) Online religious content for children restricted; (5) Sunday schools closed or driven underground. Furthermore, these restrictions affect Christian family life. As a result, Christian families with school-age children face compounded persecution. Therefore, family-based Christian asylum claims have additional dimensions.[7]

USCIRF Designations

The US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) has consistently recommended China for "Country of Particular Concern" (CPC) designation since 1999. The State Department has formally designated China as CPC repeatedly. Furthermore, USCIRF Annual Reports document continuing concerns about Christian persecution alongside Uyghur, Tibetan, and Falun Gong concerns. As a result, the religious freedom dimension is internationally recognised. Therefore, USCIRF reports support Christian asylum claims.[8]

Asylum Implications

Chinese Christian asylum claims engage: religion (most directly); particular social group (in some formulations); imputed political opinion (refusal to register with state framework viewed as political). Furthermore, the distinction between state-registered Three-Self adherents and underground church members affects risk assessment. As a result, claim strength varies by activity profile. Therefore, specific evidence of church relationship is critical.[9]

Conclusion: Sustained Crackdown

China's crackdown on Christianity under Sinicization has produced sustained pressure on underground churches and their members. Furthermore, the pattern of raids, pastor arrests, church closures, and restrictions on minors is well-documented. As a result, underground Christian asylum claims continue to have strong evidence base. Therefore, well-documented Christian cases should generally succeed.