Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Julian's avatar

I think this conversation suffers from a lack of precision. You write, “should Christians be attempting to establish Christianity as the pre-eminent religion? Should Christians ever use political power to coerce people to follow Jesus?” So the archetypal example of this would be the fundamentalist Christian who is desperate to get his political party elected so that they can impose Christian morals and what not.

I think though things are a lot more fuzzy. Is it Christian nationalism for Christians to defend or promote principles from their faith in a democratic context? Is it Christian nationalism to use Christian language to argue for those? I think not, because that would make democracy pluralistic for everyone except Christians and it would make figures like MLK jr. “Christian nationalist”.

Further, I think of something like a statue commemorating a biblical figure, or a cross in a public space—is this Christian nationalism? But what if Christianity goes deep in the culture’s DNA as it does, say in Europe (and of course in America). To remove all traces of Christianity from public life would be a tragic loss of historical memory and culture.

I’m not sure what is “Christian nationalist” about acknowledging that the US, and other Western countries have very deep Christian roots, that indeed principles of democracy and liberalism are built on Christian ideas, presuppositions, and narratives. I think it’s sensible for our country to acknowledge this legacy, and honour it, I suspect we forget it at our peril.

So while I am opposed to “imposing my faith on others”, I also think that a) being a member of a democratic society entails articulating my point of view, including using the language of faith. And b) our society has deep cultural roots in the Christian narrative that we would do well to honour and uphold. I don’t want to force anyone to adopt my point of view on both accounts, but they seem unobjectionable to me and worth articulating for the sake of honesty.

Expand full comment
Matthew's avatar

I want to make an historical correction. Constantine is not responsible for the establishment of Christianity as the state religion of the empire. Persecution of pagans only began in earnest under Constantine's successors, especially Theodosius, who banned the practice of paganism in the empire and required all his subjects to accept Nicene Orthodoxy.

And more than this, what does it even mean to say that Christianity is the pre-eminent religion? Does it require state establishment or merely laws enforcing controversial Christian moral positions? Is Britain's toothless religious establishment a form of "Christian Nationalism?" What about the state church in overwhelmingly secular Iceland? And even if we could agree on what pre-eminent means, it is clearly not sufficient to establish something as Christian nationalism, because nationalism requires a nation, and nations as we currently know them are an 18th century creation.

Expand full comment
32 more comments...

No posts