Is “Christian Nationalism” a Dangerous Heresy? Is It Faithful to Jesus?

“Christian Nationalism” is like the air we breathe. It is all around us, but we usually don’t see it. We can measure it in a variety of ways. We can even determine when it degenerates into smog that can be dangerous for our health. But, what is Christian Nationalism and is it a heresy? A working definition usually includes something like “a significant commitment by Christians (especially Christian leaders) to a national government or major political party. This formal or informal relationship frequently results in an alliance or “marriage” in which the religious believers receive some benefits, but the government/political party is the senior partner that receives the greatest benefits (votes, moral respectability, public stature of being above the law, internal cohesion, etc.) This alliance becomes heretical when it pushes believers to violate some of their most basic religious/ethical values.” Let’s look at two classical examples of Christian Nationalism before we turn to a more contemporary illustrstion.

Constantine reigned as Roman Emperor from 306 – 337 AD (at times shared, in other periods by himself). He was the first Emperor to convert to Christianity, although his knowledge of the faith seems to have been fairly limited. According to some traditions, he had a vision in 312 in which he saw a cross in the night sky and the words “with this cross you will conquer”. He then won the decisive battle of Milvian Bridge and converted to the faith shortly thereafter. In 313 the Edict of Milan de-criminalized Christianity throughout the empire and essentially ended the persecution against the faith (I approve of this edict because it promoted freedom of religion).  Christianity continued to grow numerically. Decades later, in 380 AD, the Edict of Thessalonica promoted Christianity to become the official state religion of the Roman Empire. Although some Christians celebrated this act, I believe it was generally disastrous for the true faith. Freedom of religion disappeared as people in the Empire were forced to adopt Christianity. In addition, they violated an essential belief. The early church during the first three centuries had been almost universally pacifistic. Although they would die by the sword as martyrs, in faithful obedience to the teaching of Jesus, they would not kill with the sword. This all changed with the emergence of this “Christian Nationalism” in which their so-called “Christian” emperors commanded them to kill enemies of the empire. Tragically, many followers of Christ did not love those enemies, they killed them. Just War Theory began to develop to evaluate whether these killings were “justified” or not. In addition, the simple faith of humble disciples became transformed into ostentatious cathedrals, power broker bishops, and increasing neglect of widows, orphans, foreigners and the poor in general. Later atrocious examples of Christian Nationalism, such as the Spanish Inquisition, trace their roots to this Constantinian version of the faith.  

Through various divisions in the church (including the Catholic/Orthodox schism and the Protestant Reformation), most Christians became aligned with national boundaries (for example, the Anglican Church in England). In the 1930s with Hitler’s rise to power, there was a Nazification of the Deutsche Cristen (German Christian) movement. This was a clear example of “Christian Nationalism” that approved of heretical practices antithetical to the teachings of Jesus (the persecution and slaughter of Jews, gypsies, and others, the idolatrous cult to Hitler, the “euthanasia” of handicapped people, etc.) Pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer (one of my heroes of the faith) emerged to challenge these heresies. As an alternative of resistance, he helped form the “Confessing Church” based on the Bible and teachings of Jesus. He was accused of participating in a plot to assassinate Hitler and therefore imprisoned. He was hanged on April 9, 1945.

Now let’s turn to the United States. It is sometimes affirmed that our country was founded as a “Christian Nation”. The historical evidence does not support that claim. It is true that many of our ancestors were genuine followers of Jesus and many found religious freedom here that was denied to them in Europe, but our founding documents were written by those who were more “deist” (the belief in a watchmaker divinity who starts the clock, then walks away) than by theistic Christians. Thomas Jefferson was, by far, the most influential writer of these documents. In his “Jefferson Bible” he eliminated all references to the supernatural elements of the Bible….hardly orthodox Christianity. It might be worse if we had been a Christian nation, because our multiple sins against indigenous Americans and enslaved Africans should have caused us deep shame instead of our trying to justify them.

In contrast with Europe, the United States never had a national “State Church” although there were a variety of churches that flourished in the thirteen colonies. Some scholars call this phenomenon “civil religion”. Our money and songs have religiosity sprinkled all around with phrases such as “in God we trust”, “God bless America”, and “one nation under God”. These point to a benevolent deity who blesses our actions but rarely calls us to repentance or to a change in our national behavior.

The contemporary “Christian Nationalism” movement goes much further. About fifty years ago, changes started to take place in the Bible Belt. Most white evangelicals in the South had been Democrats (Including Billy Graham), but key people in the Reagan circles began to call these evangelicals to the Republican ranks based on the issue of abortion. If abortion was tantamount to murder, what was needed was the election of a Republican president who would appoint conservatives to the Supreme Court, who would overturn the Roe v. Wade decision that had legalized abortion. As a consequence, for the last four decades, roughly 80% of white evangelical Christians have voted for the Republican presidential candidate in turn. Although they were essentially one issue voters (overturning abortion), they tended to adopt Republican perspectives on other issues (strong military, anti-immigrant, anti-environment, etc.). In my not-so-humble opinion, these perspectives do not always line up with the ethical teaching of Jesus. These negative tendencies of “Christian Nationalism” have reached a crescendo with the presidency of Trump. I believe much of this is due to a failure of evangelical leaders, like Franklin Graham. When confronted with Trump’s most obvious womanizing and racist actions, these leaders replied “Just hold your nose, and vote for him anyway, because you are really voting for conservative justices in the Supreme Court who will overturn Roe”. They were applying the sub-Christian maxim of “the end justifies the means” (the good end of overturning Roe justifies the election of a deeply flawed president). These leaders failed the church because they should have taught the full teaching and example of Jesus.

One of the most tragic aspects of Christian nationalism is that Christians tend to passionately defend governmental decisions and actions as if they had been ordered by God even when they are false and sinful.  

Some of the most recent are the following:

  • House Speaker Johnson’s alibis why he didn’t swear in Representative Adelita Grijalva for over a month.
  • The stalling and coverup of the Epstein files. If Trump has nothing to hide, why do evangelicals appear to be protecting pedophiles?
  • Secretary Hegseth’s order to strike boats in the Caribbean and Pacific without the White House obtaining authorization from Congress. Merely saying we are in a war against drugs does not mean authorization to kill over 80 people in boats.
  • Back on April 16, 2016 Hegseth said, “I do think there have to be consequences for abject war crimes. If you’re doing something that is just completely unlawful and ruthless, then there is a consequence for that. That’s why the military said it won’t follow unlawful orders from their commander in chief. There’s a standard, there’s an ethos, there’s a belief that we are above what so many things that our enemies or others would do.” This is the exact same policy that a group of six Democratic members of Congress cited in a video that they aired two weeks ago which enraged Hegseth and Trump who labeled their video as seditious and called for their deaths. Why can’t evangelicals acknowledge that this is hypocrisy?

We are in perilous times when “Christian Nationalism” poses a real threat to the Christian faith and to our country. It is so pervasive that it is frequently not even recognized. Let me end this post with a Sacred Cow, the Pledge of Allegiance. This is so commonplace that most people recite it without examining it. It’s a “no-brainer”. I suggest we do use our brains to ask tough questions. Why would followers of Jesus pledge allegiance to a country (led by flawed human authorities)? The early Christians declared Jesus was the Lord, the emperor was not. Faithful Christians in Germany did not pledge allegiance to Hitler’s Nazi agenda. Should Christians in Russia pledge allegiance to Putin’s authoritarian regime? Let’s respond with courage, clarity, truth and respect.

A Latin American Journal Worth Reading

The Spring issue of our Journal of Latin American Theology is hot off the press! Since 2006 we have published two issues per year, but this issue is one of the very best. It has some excellent articles, book and film reviews and theopoetry.

One of my heroes in Latin American history has been Bartolome de las Casas. He denounced the immoral conquest of the Americas that used Christianity as a pretext. As a bishop, he became the Defender of the Indigenous. He urged Christians to preach the gospel with their lives and not with hypocritical words. Yet even heroes have their flaws. In his article on De las Casas, Luis Tapia Rubio alerts us to some of those flaws and sketches out a better way for Christianity to interact with society.

Most of us who live in the United States are frustrated by the low level of political discourse in our country. We can learn a lot from how Christians in Latin America interface with their political realities. Peruvian theologian Dario Lopez points out the failures and successes of “evangélicos” and their politics in his article “Anointed to Rule: Fundamentalist Evangelicals in the Public Square”. Milton Mejia analyzes the role of Christians in the reconciliation process in Colombia.

Regarding the complex phenomenon of global immigration, the Brazilian Mariani Xavier shares her insights from the Biblical texts. Fabio Salguero Fagoaga addresses the same issue in light of aporophobia, a disdain for the poor. He urges readers to do something quite radical: actually following the teaching and example of Jesus.

Theologian Valdir Steuernagel urges followers of Jesus to share the whole gospel to all peoples. He suggests many Latin American examples. The two examples of theopoetry explore the suggestive themes of a God who does not “sunset” and submerging ourselves in God’s mystery.

Of course, the journal is available on Amazon and the articles can be downloaded from the ATLA data base.