Christian nationalism?

Dear Editor,

I was interested to read Michael Reade’s Comment piece on en's website (see article here) defending Christian nationalism and responding to articles by Ryan Burton King (see Ryan's piece here) and me (see here).

I have responded in greater depth to Michael’s article on my own site but thought it would be helpful to provide a brief response here.

First, I wonder if it is helpful to open a discussion by denouncing those you disagree with as offering alarmist diatribes and overreacting. Perhaps it would be better to simply respond to the substance of what others are saying rather than trying to colour the way that people might read them. This would make for a better, good faith discussion.

Secondly, I wonder if Reade is himself a Christian nationalist and therefore in the best place to defend the movement. He seems to wish to narrow the definition in to simply mean that Christians should be engaged in the public square and promote Christianity. I have no problem with this and am engaged personally in such a way. The church where I serve as an elder has the aim of “being for the good of the city” as part of its mission statement. However, Christian nationalism is defined much more broadly than this noting specifically Wolfe’s description of it as “nationalism modified by Christianity".

Thirdly, Reade asks whether I would accuse the Magisterial Reformers as heretics in the same way that I’ve argued that modern Christian nationalists are. This is rather fallacious for two reasons. First because there is a difference between identifying a specific entity now as sinful and false, and tracing back the roots of ideas that have been brought together into that philosophy. Secondly because if he looks carefully at my article, he will see that I’ve described a specific thing as heretical and that is the co-opting of Christianity into a far right ethno-cultural nationalism. Would Reade be unwilling to identify Christianised fascism/national socialism as heretical? I doubt it. 

Fourthly, Reade wonders if I consider the Reformers ignorant of Scripture in terms of our status as exiles and strangers. Yet what he fails to do is to actually argue from Scripture as to why I might be wrong on this. The default line seems to be that a lot of people have believed a certain thing (whether or not he is actually correct on this), therefore there is no permission to challenge. He seeks to insult the historic Baptistic position as a “fringe minority report” as though Baptists at the time were unaware that they were in a minority. That people might hold minority positions without being imprisoned, exiled or drowned was exactly their point! If we had rejected things because they were the minority position throughout history then we would not have abolished the slave trade, reformed factory laws or indeed had the Reformation in the first place. 

Yours sincerely,
Dave Williams
By email