The John Locke Foundation embraces some aspects of conservatism, but it is not especially a social/ cultural conservative think tank. Its interests are primarily economic; and its slant is almost libertarian.
Yesterday, it published an article that had the net effect of attacking Christian nationalism. I want to point out that this article was written by an intern; and my interest is not to attack this young woman. Instead, the editor at Carolina Journal is at fault.
One tip-off that the article was biased was the fact that it chose to highlight most prominently the comments of J.D. Greear– an opponent of Christian nationalism.
I will highlight some of the passages:
Greear warned against movements that seek to use government authority to enforce Christianity itself.
“The other side is where people then want the government to mandate essentially that people be Christians,” Greear said.
Greear has consistently emphasized religious liberty, arguing that while many American laws, freedoms, and ideals have a Christian foundation, Baptist theology has historically rejected the idea that government should compel worship or enforce religious belief.
“We just never looked at the government to compel worship or to mandate adherence to a Christian conscience,” Greear said. “Typically you use words like religious liberty and freedom of conscience as areas that government should stay out of.”
This is a complete misrepresentation of Christian nationalism. I have followed this movement for several years. Its key adherents DO NOT advocate that government force people to be Christians. That, in fact, would be contrary to the Christian religion that requires us to make our own decisions to believe and repent.
Greear also distinguished between the role of individual Christians and pastors themselves, arguing that pastors should avoid presenting personal political preferences as equivalent to biblical teaching.
“The church’s authority is rooted in the Bible and the gospel,” Greear said.
He added that while pastors can speak clearly on issues Scripture directly addresses, they should avoid turning disputed political issues into doctrinal positions.
The issue of pastors discussing political issues in the pulpit is not a key component of Christian nationalism. Some prominent figures have advocated they should do this more– such as Eric Metaxas– but this is not the Christian nationalists’ focus. Instead, their desire is for government to promote the Christian religion; and for our leaders to govern in a manner that our Christian God would prefer as reflected in the entire counsel of scripture. That is, in fact, what we had during the early years of the Republic.
“There’s a danger right now of people trying to say that the US government is the extension of God’s kingdom,” Greear added. “It is not. It is a temporary, secular government that has limits.”
Again, that is not my understanding of what Christian nationalists want. I stated a couple of paragraphs back what their objectives are. The alternative to Christian nationalism is secularism; and that is what the critics of Christian nationalism ultimately want.
The article then seizes upon issues like race and an impolitic statement made by one of its adherents. It did this in a manner that is comparable to what we would expect from a mainstream media publication. The objective was clearly to undermine what the movement has been trying to achieve.
I don’t know whether JD Greear is truly ignorant of the Christian nationalist movement, or if he is disingenuously attempting to mislead people. If he speaks out about a subject, he has the obligation to understand it.
The author of the piece is correct that the key figure associated with Christian nationalism– Stephen Wolfe– lives here in North Carolina. This is a gentleman whose work I have greatly admired.
But the young intern who wrote this article desperately needed an editor who could have helped her write a stronger, more valid piece.
Be the first to reply