Every once in a while, we hear about some of our fellow citizens pursuing “Christian
Nationalism.” I can see how the term might be appealing. For those who believe in Jesus’
message, putting those teachings into practice seems a noble aspiration. However, there are some problems beneath the label of this political strategy, and it may be helpful to consider them.
As a non-Christian, I must admit that my first thought is about the many American citizens who are also not Christian. Our nation has millions of God-fearing and pious people who practice religions other than Christianity. Add to them the millions of good and patriotic people who are not religious at all. “Christian Nationalism” leaves out lots of us, but this is not my main point.
My main observation—as an outsider looking in—is that Christianity is a vast and rich religious civilization with many different opinions as to what God wants people to believe and do. Anyone who does not see the great diversity within Christianity needs to take a closer look.
Consider the millions of Americans who regard themselves Christian but who are excluded from this category by other Christians. Are Roman Catholics Christians? What about the various Protestant denominations, or the Latter-Day Saints (Mormons)? Many groups consider themselves “Christian” but are excluded from that category by other groups based on theological and ecclesiastical factors. Just which Christians do Christian Nationalists include?
This is not a new situation. Remember Quakers like William Penn whose “Christianity” was so “deviant” that they fled England for the safer shores of Pennsylvania. Remember how Rhode Island was founded by Baptists who fled the religious persecution perpetrated by other Christians in Massachusetts. And remember Thomas Jefferson’s famous 1802 letter declaring the “wall of separation between Church and State.” The issue was not that non-Christians were worried about America becoming a “Christian nation.” No. The issue was that Baptists in Danbury, Connecticut were unhappy with other Christian denominations imposing their religious doctrines on state law.
The fact is that there are lots of different opinions among Christians as to what is right and true—and all these positions can be backed up with Biblical interpretations. Many Christians are opposed to the Death Penalty, while many others support it. Many Christians tend to pacifist positions, while others see militarism as important. Many Christians believe that Jesus’ teachings about charity should be expressed in government programs, while others believe that charity should be a private sector affair. There are different positions taken by Christians on all sorts of public policy issues. What, one could ask, is the “Christian” position on funding for state universities, or subsidies for the Johnstown Airport, or voting by mail, or the route for the new four-lane portion of Highway 322?
Back around 1980, Reverend Jerry Falwell got a lot of attention for his version of Christian Nationalism which he called the “Moral Majority.” He stood on five main goals/planks. He opposed abortion, homosexuality, and pornography, and he supported the B-1 Bomber and the Abrams Tank. Though the first three issues can reasonably be addressed in religious circles, Ialways found it incredible that Reverend Falwell somehow thought that particular weapon-systems were Biblically based. While one can clearly make a Biblical case for defense, why would one airplane design be more Biblical than another? Though his movement started off with lots of fanfare and energy, the publication of these specific goals signaled the beginning of it demise. It is one thing to declare that Christianity is important, but many of the specific decisions of government are not amenable to Biblical proof texts.
Christian Nationalism’s main flaw is that it assumes a consensus—a generic “Christianity”—upon which “all” agree. This is simply not the case, and any government devoted to “Christian Nationalism” will inevitably surprise and disappoint lots and lots of Christians.