Should Christians Rule the World?
An essay written in 2022, “National Conservatism: A Statement of Principles,” outlines a conservative agenda to restore America’s “patriotism and courage, honor and loyalty, religion and wisdom, congregation and family, man and woman, the Sabbath and the sacred, and reason and justice.” How can anyone argue with these principles? Still, the age-old idiom “the devil is in the details” is an important litmus test to validate the merits of this proposal. The more closely one studies the details of this document, the more understanding one will gain of its overall intentions. Questions such as, “If these principles are implemented, how would they affect our democracy?” or “Are these principles compatible with the teachings of Scripture?” or “Will this conservative agenda promote a greater acceptance of diversity in our country and lead to more understanding between races and religions?”
After reading the article several times, I came away with significant reservations. The National Conservatism essay leans toward a Christian theocracy, where clergy or priests rule in the name of God, an ideology I strongly oppose. The document derives its principles of conservatism from a narrow interpretation of Christian faith and runs counter to the U.S. Constitution.
I understand the fear these writers have of an eroding American culture, but is a Christian theocracy the answer? Should God be forced upon people? Scripture reveals that people are wooed into the Kingdom of God, not coerced. Whenever a theocracy has been tried in the past—think Constantine, the Holy Roman Empire, France’s persecution of the Huguenots, and Calvin’s Geneva—the results have led to an erosion of authentic faith.
Now, the document doesn’t explicitly advocate a theocracy, but the intentions are clear. In the paragraph addressing “God and Public Religion,” for instance, the authors write, “Where a Christian majority exists, public life should be rooted in Christianity and its moral vision, which should be honored by the state and other institutions both public and private.” This statement alone raises serious red flags!
If this principle were adopted, it would mean that civil and criminal law would be legislated through a Christian worldview, where the dogma of the Christian religion would be the decisive factor wherever there was a Christian majority. This National Conservatism ideology represents a form of theocracy, which runs counter to the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and also to the teachings of the New Testament.
The First Amendment prohibits the government from making laws respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise of religion. If legislation were passed that adopted a Christian worldview in both the public and private spheres, the non-Christian minority would, in effect, become second-class citizens. While there is a distinction between a Christian identity and an American identity, one can be a patriotic American without being a Christian. Moreover, one can be a moral and ethical person without being a Christian. The Founding Fathers would have found these National Conservative principles anathema. They were well aware of the violent European religious wars in the 17th century and, consequently, endorsed a wide religious perspective in the Constitution. It is no accident that the name God does not occur in the U.S. Constitution, and in the Declaration of Independence the term God occurs more as a generic title than the particular name of a specific deity—“Nature’s God,” “Creator,” and “Divine Providence.”
I am not saying that Christian values have no place in the public square. I believe it is extremely important that people of faith share their values. Christians should not only live out their morals and ethics but unashamedly and humbly advocate their way of life to others. To be clear, the church should speak up for the poor, the homeless, and those without health care. Christians should voice their opposition to corrupt and greedy politicians who only serve their self-interests. Christians should raise concerns to congressional leaders that economic disparity threatens to undermine national security and social harmony. In our country, for instance, a small number of families have as much wealth as half the population. This is a recipe for civil unrest.
While it is appropriate that Christians raise objections to the erosion of the moral and ethical moorings in our country, it is destructive, I believe, to use political pressure to enforce Christian values. Even if Christians were to become a majority in a city, state or country, their faith convictions should never be legislatively elevated above other religions. In the kingdom of heaven, might most certainly does not make right! If by following the way of Jesus the quality of our lives is unconvincing to nonbelievers, then any Christian legislation that might be passed would have zero effect or, perhaps, even a negative effect. If people of faith do not live out the values they profess, then, as Voltaire famously said, people will laugh at their hypocrisy. And if people ever begin laughing at the church, then that would be a sign they have lost respect for the church, and the church would be finished as a witness of Jesus Christ.
Christian Nationalism fundamentally misunderstands the teachings of Jesus and the role of the church. Jesus desired to liberate people, to make them free; Christian Nationalism desires to control people and push a radical ideological interpretation of what constitutes faith. Jesus rejected political power as a means to advance God’s Kingdom (see the Desert Temptations, Lk. 4:1-13); Christian Nationalism seeks to use political power to advance its goals.
Jesus emphasized God’s love for all people and his kingdom was inclusive. Rich or poor, Black or White, sinner or saint, all were welcomed by Jesus. Christian Nationalism, by its very nature, is exclusive, emphasizing that its adherents should dominate wherever they can. Jesus refused the way of violence to accomplish his goals, but Christian Nationalism uses violence in an attempt to accomplish its agenda. I was horrified to see, in the January 6, 2021 insurrection, Christian Nationalists carrying banners that read, “Jesus Saves,” while they proudly broke into the U.S. Capitol and violently assaulted the police. Scores of people were injured, and in the aftermath of the mayhem five officers died.
Jesus was once asked by his disciples who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 18). His answer is telling: “Unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, whoever humbles himself like this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.”
Jesus doesn’t want us to imitate the traits of a child, that is, to become childish. To become like a little child means to humble oneself and give up all pretensions of self-importance and status. In other words, the greatest in the kingdom is the one who refuses to be caught up in the argument of who is the greatest!
So, is it legitimate to use political pressure to enforce Christian values? Not according to Jesus and the U.S. Constitution.
