American politics has a new boogeyman. Editorial writers across the country are frantically warning us about the dangers of Christian nationalism. From Anchorage to Miami, Dallas and elsewhere, newspapers are sounding the alarm.
But like so many manufactured issues, the term ‘Christian nationalism’ is specifically vague. It sounds like an actual thing yet has no clear definition so it can mean anything. This may account for why specific threats from Christian nationalism are so rarely cited.
Most critics do no more than launch invectives against Christians, promote falsehoods about America’s founding, and issue fuzzy warnings about the future of democracy. The rhetoric is sometimes startling. One writer went so far as to compare Christians to the Taliban; it’s a leading indicator of the recent hysteria over Christian nationalism.
A few particulars are sprinkled into criticisms of Christian nationalism. Some worry it might lead to an increase in voluntary public prayer. Others are concerned that more babies will be born. Most argue it will lead to an American theocracy, destroying the separation of church and state.
For the gazillionth time, the U.S. Constitution says nothing about separation of church and state. It says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
If any of these critics know a congressman who wants to pass a law establishing a state religion, or prohibiting people from worshiping, please tell us who it is so I and 75 million other Americans can send his office an email telling him to knock it off.
Most importantly, purveyors of misinformation about Christian nationalism appear to have little understanding of the Reformation. It is the bedrock of biblical Christianity, and greatly influenced the American founding and modern law.
Consider the writings of Martin Luther. His 1520 Address to the German Nobility expressly advocated a separation of the secular government from the church in Rome, seat of the largest theocracy in Europe. He exhorted Christians to recognize two separate and distinctive governing entities; one spiritual and one secular.
Fourteenth-century philosopher and theologian John Wycliffe was also an advocate of separating the government from the church, arguing that clerics held too much power among the governing English nobles of the day.
French theologian John Calvin, a contemporary of Luther’s, explicitly warned against combining church and state, writing, “We must keep in mind that distinction which we have previously laid down so that we do not (as commonly happens) unwisely mingle these two, which have a completely different nature.”
The philosophies of Calvin, Luther, Wycliffe and other leaders of the Reformation, as they pertain to separate entities governing our secular and spiritual lives, are woven throughout biblical Christianity. They were the driving force behind the First Amendment to our Constitution. To claim that evangelical Christians are now prepared to recant more than 500 years of doctrine regarding the church and state is beyond laughable.
It’s fair to examine the Reformation and its principles in the political context of the day. The Reformers may well have espoused church/state separation because they hoped a civil government might intervene when the church wanted to burn them at the stake. Yet those principles were so durable, they still prevail in 21st-century America. Clearly, the idea of keeping the church separate from government eclipsed any immediate desire for self-preservation.
It is ironic that critics of Christian nationalism often quote Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address when articulating the democracy they claim they want to preserve. But Lincoln’s 1863 speech borrowed one of its most famous lines, word for word, from Wycliffe, who wrote in the introduction of his 1384 English translation of the Latin scripture, “This Bible is for the Government of the People, by the People, for the People.”
Some may seek to portray this as evidence that biblical Christianity espouses establishing a theocracy, but it doesn’t. Wycliffe knew the Bible provided a principled basis for civil society. So did Lincoln. People warning us about Christian nationalism may disagree with Lincoln but curiously, they do not propose an alternative basis for governing. Why might that be?
History is filled with examples of governments based on something other than biblical principles. The National Socialist German Workers’ Party instituted an alternative a century ago. So did the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics in 1922. The Communist Party of China followed suit when it took over in 1949. One can be forgiven for noticing a trend among governments that eschew the Bible.
The vigor with which Christian nationalism is opposed is not about preventing an American theocracy. It’s a reflection of the fear it instills among those who prefer greater or lesser degrees of totalitarianism.
I learned in the military that you don’t take flack unless you’re over the target. Given the bellicosity focused on Christian nationalism, I’d say it has the ideology of the American Left squarely in its cross-hairs.
“To claim that evangelical Christians are now prepared to recant more than 500 years of doctrine regarding the church and state is beyond laughable.”
There’s a few who still do, and I am fairly confident that someone will comment here and demonstrate that.
There are always a few, tthat do or say anything. Your point is?
See below, is all I wanted to say but the software won’t allow it so pointless words added.
As we grow closer to becoming a Socialist State here in America it is imperative that the tyrants in the government and the media demonize and mischaractorize Christians and the Biblical premise on nationalism. To love Gd is to also love and desire a just government that is fair. Christianity doesn’t want to force a Theocracy on any nation. Christianity only wants to prevent despots from firing a dictatorship on thise who are citizens of a nation.
Our freedoms are given to us by Almighty God, not man.
Christian nationalism puts the focus of our liberty in a proper perspective.
Martin Luther was a major hero of the Nazis and the Lutheran Church was staunchly pro-Nazi!
“There was also Martin Luther, regarded by the Nazis as a major hero, who was the greatest single power in the development of German religion and through this means, an influence on the philosophies of Kant and Hegel. Luther is anti-reason (“Whoever wants to be a Christian should tear the eyes out of his reason”), intensely pro-German, and crudely anti-Semitic (“Fie on you wherever you be, you damned Jews, who dare to clasp this earnest, glorious, consoling word of God to your magotry, mortal, miserly belly, and are not ashamed to display your greed so openly”). He formally enlists God on the side of the state. Unconditional obedience to the government’s edicts, he holds, is a Christian virtue. “In like manner we must endure the authority of the prince. If he misuse or abuse his authority, we are not to entertain a grudge, seek revenge or punishment. Obedience is to be rendered for God’s sake, for the ruler is God’s representative. However they may tax or exact we must obey and endure patiently….
“There is on earth among all dangers no more dangerous thing than a richly endowed and adroit reason”, Luther had said, “Reason must be deluded, blinded, and destroyed.”…
As for the Lutherans, most had followed the lead of such figures as Pastor Adolf Stoecker; they had rejected capitalism as an evil, Jewish idea, incompatible with the spirit of Christianity….
Religious writers often claim that the cause of Nazism is the secularism or scientific spirit of the modern world. This evades the fact that the Germans of the time, especially in Prussia, were one of the most religious peoples in Western Europe; that the Weimar Republic was a hotbed of mystic cults, of which Nazism was one; and that Germany’s largest and most devout religious group, the Lutherans, counted themselves among Hitler’s staunchest followers” – Leonard Peikoff, “The Ominous Parallels: The End of Freedom In America”
The notion that Jews (and later Christians) were susceptible to apostasy and the worship of pagan gods is as old as the Bible and was one of the major themes of the Bible. The Hebrew prophets preached against idolatry and so did Jesus and the early Christians. This stemmed from their realistic view of human nature as flawed and weak, as symbolically represented in the story of the Fall. If religious faith fails to provide a guarantee of a moral life, so do “objectivism,” “reason,” and “science.” Nazi Germany was one of the most scientifically advanced nations in the world.
Like all good leftists, you took a reference completely out of context and added a bunch of irrelevant quotes to try to support your atheist view. I realize I’m just adding to the already large amount of people who have told you how ridiculous and irrelevant your comments are, but I had time to kill today.
As with today’s left, the Nazis were neo-pagans intent on returning to a pre-Christian worldview and ethic, extolling “nature” and despising the “unnatural” Christian ethic. Nazism was a politicized religion with its own symbols and rituals. If any Christians were stupid enough to follow the Nazis, they would have eventually met the same fate as the Jews had the Nazis triumphed. They were dupes, just like today’s Christian leftists.
Flak, not flack. Detalis matter according to Jack Reacher.
short for fliegerabwehrkanone
Details, not detalis
True followers of Jesus, under whatever banner (Catholic, Protestant, Independent, Evangelical, etc.,) know that we have much to regret in the way the gospel of Jesus has been witnessed by our forebears and even more so today. The Apostle John gives us pause when he relates that he and the other Jesus followers saw that Jesus was full of Grace AND Truth. The tension inherent in speaking Truth to our fellow sinners while magnifying the Grace of Jesus toward them is a daunting challenge. Living out this gospel today inevitably gets us into politics and we must walk carefully and prayerfully,
“But like so many manufactured issues, the term ‘Christian nationalism’ is specifically vague. It sounds like an actual thing yet has no clear definition so it can mean anything.”
Exactly. It is devoid of any specific content and seems intended to create a subliminal link with odious terms like “white nationalism” and “white supremacy.” Similarly, the phrases “climate deniers” and “election deniers” are – on the surface – meaningless but seem intended to draw a connection with the term “Holocaust deniers,” putting the “deniers” on the same moral and intellectual footing as those who deny the obvious facts of the Holocaust.
“Most argue it will lead to an American theocracy, destroying the separation of church and state.”
Meanwhile, the left is trying to make a kind of neo-paganism our de facto national religion. Christian symbols are increasingly being prohibited or dismantled and replaced with symbols of the left, such as the “pride” flag. A teacher has to go to the Supreme Court to defend his right to say a prayer on a football field after a game, but on a daily basis LGBTQ+ activists are busy indoctrinating young students into their worldview and promoting their lifestyle.
By framing the discussion as “Much Ado About Christian Nationalism,” the title acknowledges the significance and widespread attention this issue has garnered. It prompts readers to examine the various perspectives and arguments surrounding the topic, fostering an open dialogue and encouraging critical analysis. In summary, “Much Ado About Christian Nationalism” is a title that provokes curiosity and invites readers to explore the multifaceted nature of the relationship between religion and nationalism. It promises a nuanced and thoughtful examination of this timely and relevant subject, offering the opportunity for deeper insights and a better understanding of its implications in contemporary society. wikilifeteller
Nice Article
hindivideo.com.in
The passage you provided reflects a quote from Luther and offers historical context on the relationship between Lutherans, capitalism, and Nazism. It highlights the complex dynamics at play during that time, challenging common assumptions about the causes of Nazism.
It is crucial to recognize that attributing the rise of Nazism solely to secularism or scientific spirit oversimplifies the reality. The Germans, including Lutherans, were deeply religious, and mystical cults thrived in the Weimar Republic, which served as a breeding ground for Nazi ideology.
Leonard Peikoff’s book, “The Ominous Parallels: The End of Freedom In America,” sheds light on these intricate connections, questioning widely held beliefs and inviting critical examination of historical events.
This passage invites us to explore the interplay between religion, politics, and societal influences, acknowledging that simplistic explanations fall short in capturing the complexities of Nazism’s origins. It underscores the need for nuanced analysis and a comprehensive understanding of historical contexts.
By delving into these intricate relationships and critically examining the factors that contributed to the rise of Nazism, we can gain deeper insights into the dangers of unchecked ideologies and the importance of safeguarding freedom and justice in our own societies.
https://rwaltz.com/services/defi-development
The topic of Christian nationalism has indeed gained attention and sparked debates in American politics. While some argue that it poses a threat to the principles of secularism and religious pluralism, others believe that the term itself lacks a precise definition, leading to a broad interpretation that can encompass various beliefs and actions.
It is important to approach discussions on Christian nationalism with nuance and careful analysis. While there may be instances where the fusion of religious and national identities can be problematic, it is equally crucial to respect individuals’ rights to hold their religious beliefs and participate in the political process.
As with any complex issue, it is essential to foster open dialogue, promote understanding, and avoid the tendency to label and generalize. By engaging in respectful conversations and addressing specific concerns rather than invoking broad and ambiguous terms, we can better navigate the complexities of religious and political dynamics in society.
Ultimately, it is the responsibility of individuals, communities, and policymakers to uphold the principles of religious freedom, equality, and the separation of church and state, ensuring that the rights and liberties of all citizens are protected and respected.
Token Development
Gyms World, a leading fitness center, aims to revolutionize the way people approach their fitness goals. In this ultimate guide, we’ll explore how you can help you achieve your fitness goals and lead a healthier life. Gyms World, a leading fitness center, aims to revolutionize the way people approach their fitness goals. In this ultimate guide, we’ll explore how you can help you achieve your fitness goals and lead a healthier life.