What Does Christian Nationalism Stands for and Do the Two Words Reflect Positive Values

I draw upon Joyce Vance to explain such during her interview with Amanda Tyler, a lawyer who is the executive director of the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty. This is taken from Civil Discourse.

Five Questions With Christian Nationalism Expert Amanda Tyler

by Joyce Vance

Civil Discourse

Earlier this week, Missouri Senator Josh Hawley said,

“Some will say now that I am calling America a Christian Nation. So I am. And some will say that I am advocating Christian Nationalism. And so I do.”

Taken at face value, those two words, when put together, could have positive connotations for many people, suggesting the convergence of Christian values and love of country. But that’s most definitely not what “Christian nationalism” means in America today.

Tonight we’re joined by Amanda Tyler, a lawyer who is the executive director of the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty. The organization defines its mission as upholding the historic Baptist principle of religious liberty: defending the free exercise of religion and protecting against its establishment by government. She is the lead organizer of BJC’s Christians Against Christian Nationalism campaign and co-host of BJC’s Respecting Religion podcast, an outspoken voice in support of both religion and religious freedom.

Tyler is the author of a forthcoming book on this topic, “How to End Christian Nationalism,” which is due out in October. We are fortunate to have her with us tonight to help us understand what Christian nationalism stands for and to help us help others understand that two words that sound like they reflect positive values can have a far different meaning in reality, one that should concern all of us.

“Five Questions” is a feature for paid subscribers. It’s my way of thanking people who support this work financially so I can devote more time and resources to it. I value having all of you here—free subscriptions will always be available. I’m very grateful to everyone who reads the newsletter and engages in the hard but essential work of civil discourse.

Joyce: What is Christian nationalism? And to make sure we understand, is it a religious movement? What are the movement’s goals? [Editors note: Contrary to Josh Hawley’s usage, Amanda tells me she does not capitalise “nationalism” in this context and I have followed her practice in my questions.]

Amanda: Christian nationalism is a political ideology and cultural framework that merges Christian and American identities, threatening democracy and religious freedom in the process. Christian nationalism is also a highly-funded and well-organized movement that uses the symbols and language of Christianity as political props in service of gaining and maintaining power. The movement’s goal is to transform the secular nature of our democracy into an authoritarian theocracy. That’s why I’ve called Christian nationalism the single greatest threat to religious freedom in the United States today. 

Joyce: Is the word “Christian” used to signify this is a religious movement, or is it something else?

Amanda: The “Christian” in “Christian nationalism” is more about an ethno-national identity than it is about theology. Christian nationalism is a gross distortion of the teachings of Jesus, who was always on the side of the marginalized and oppressed. The central message of Christianity is a Gospel of love. That’s why so many Christians like myself are horrified to see our faith used to give credence to the violence and divisiveness that can be inspired by the ideology.  Modern proponents of Christian nationalism often point back to the founding of the United States, and falsely claim that the U.S. was divinely created as a Christian nation. Christian nationalism seeks to reverse modern advances in areas such as women’s rights and LGBTQ equality, perpetuating a caste system that provides full citizenship rights only to the people who held power at the founding. 

Joyce: Does Christian nationalism pose a threat to religious freedom in our country? Is the Christian nationalist view at odds with the Founders’ intent when they inserted the Establishment Clause into the First Amendment? What level of tolerance does Christian nationalism have for other religions and for non-believers?

Amanda: Christian nationalism poses an urgent threat to our country’s promise of religious freedom. While that promise has never been fully realized, the Constitution provides the framework of equality for all without regard to religion. The Founders could have established a Christian nation, but intentionally rejected that path by mentioning religion exactly one time in the original document, in Article VI:  “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

They chose deliberately to create a religious freedom nation instead, including with the first 16 words of the Bill of Rights: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Both the “no establishment” and “free exercise” clauses are vital to protecting everyone’s religious freedom. The separation of church and state is one of the most profound, beneficial elements of our constitutional system of government. An authoritarian theocracy in the United States would likely bring calamity on religious minorities and the nonreligious, while also harming the freedom of those who hold the majority faith. In order for faith to thrive, it must be freely chosen and not imposed by any governmental authority. 

Joyce: In December 2022, you testified to Congress about the threat posed by Christian nationalism. Then, in October 2023, you testified again where you had a great exchange with Rep. Maxwell Frost. What was the most important information you shared, and are things getting better or worse?

Amanda: I am very grateful to Rep. Jamie Raskin for inviting me to testify twice to the House Oversight Committee, first on the connection between Christian nationalism and white supremacist violence and then on the importance of upholding religious freedom domestically so we have the moral authority to advocate for international religious freedom. What ground would we have to stand on to talk about the danger of various theocracies around the world if we ourselves are headed in that direction here? I’m glad you brought up the exchange with Rep. Frost.

I was delighted to learn about his Baptist upbringing and get to talk with him as a fellow Christian committed to taking on Christian nationalism. There’s a widely held misperception that addressing Christian nationalism will be interpreted as attacking Christians. This couldn’t be more untrue. Christians across the political and theological spectrum are concerned about the current resurgence of Christian nationalism and are working to protect democracy. I’m glad that people continue to come across my testimony on social media and learn more about how Christians can normalize speaking out against Christian nationalism.

Joyce: Many Americans who identify as Christian may hear “Christian nationalism” and think “Christian patriotism,” i.e., a good thing. How do we, in our conversations with them, draw important distinctions for people who don’t understand what this really means, that this a movement that differs from mainstream Christianity and poses a threat to democracy?

Amanda: Patriotism is a healthy love of country that can be expressed in a number of different ways: voting, helping other people to vote, exercising our constitutional rights, and volunteering in our communities. But patriotism, like faith, must be freely chosen and not forced. When we demand allegiance to our country above all other allegiances, we veer into the dangerous waters of nationalism and risk idolizing our country over our love of God and love of neighbor. No country is perfect, and there are plenty of U.S. policies that depart from the Gospel and its numerous teachings. As Christians, we pray for God’s kingdom on earth as it is in heaven. We must maintain a healthy sense of separation from government if we are to advocate for the kinds of policies that would create the beloved community here on earth. 

Many thanks to Amanda for helping us with a precise understanding of what this widely used—and widely misunderstood—movement is about and what it means for all of us if it is permitted to become embedded in the next administration.

We’re in this together,

Joyce