Is your church addressing Christian Nationalism?

[wnylib]

A recent newsletter from my church brings up Christian Nationalism as we approach the July 4 holiday.

Many churches, especially mainline ones, focus on religious faith, not politics. But when some religious denominations and individuals promote a merging of religion and politics, it becomes necessary to address the issue.

The newsletter that I received quotes Pamela Cooper-White on Christian Nationalism. She is the author of the book, Christian Nationalism: Why People Are Drawn in and How to Talk Across the Divide.

She says, "Christian Nationalism is a fanatical, radical departure from the teachings of Jesus and any faithful reading of the Gospels, and it is also dangerously anti-democratic."

https://www.ministrymatters.com/lead/entry/11392/addressing-christian-nationalism

[samplegirl]

2. Like this guy here in our town?

This is on one pastors page.

Morning devotional thoughts. Is ”the” problem in America really a 40 year high inflation rate, unprecedented high gas prices, rising cost of living that is pushing a new recession? Or, is “the” problem, a declining moral and spiritual condition.… from those of us who should know better, Jesus’ followers. Sadly, I have watched sad, heartbreaking news in the church world bring unprecedented ridicule to the entire body of Christ over the last few weeks. What is worse, is that this news is mainly propagated by Christian brothers and some well meaning sisters in Christ. Who like cheap media reporters seek to be first in Breaking the news. If only we were as good at effectively and precisely propagating the Gospel (The Good News) as we were in propagating the bad news. May we return to the heart of God.

[wnylib]

3. That message looks a bit ambiguous to me.

How is that minister defining "moral decline"? Who does he consider is bringing "unprecedented ridiculed upon the entire body of Christ" and what ridicule is he speaking of?

The newsletter that I received was specific. It mentioned recent SC rulings and the Christian Nationalist movement as harmful to both religion and to democratic government.

[Scrivener7]

4. THIS is a great question. Real Christian pastors should be out with bullhorns on this.

I'm not seeing it anywhere outside the churches. But the question of whether it is being denounced inside churches and if not, why not? is a great one.

[Roy Rolling]

5. Here's the dilemma

Do people believe Jesus needs to partner with individual state governments to carry out God’s will and destiny for all? Whatever morality one believes, do we think the assistance and approval of U.S. politicians is required to guide one’s spiritual path to enlightenment and service?

Did Jesus work with the Romans and Jewish establishment to establish strict laws to further his ideas of service to God and others? Or did he turn over tables of money changers at the temple and later ride into town on a donkey?

I’m still learning, you tell me.

[wnylib]

9. This is how I would answer your questions.

First question, some people do believe that. They are the ones that are referred to as Christian Nationalists in the link. Others call them Christofascists. They violate the first amendment by imposing their beliefs as law for everyone to follow.

Second question - It is not the place of politicians to tell churches and other faith organizations what spiritual path to follow or how to follow it. That also violates the first amendment.

Third question - No, he didn't. Regarding Roman government, he said, "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's."

Regarding the Jewish establishment, he preached in synagogues as well as in the countryside to crowds of people, which was within the custom of the times. He discussed and interpreted Jewish law, as did many rabbis at the time. There were numerous sects within Judaism at the time. He overturned the tables of the money changers because they were using the temple for business profits instead of respecting it as a spiritual place of worship. That was a religious move to condemn religious abuses of the people and the temple.

Last question, the part following the words "or did he" - You have reversed the order of events. The ride into Jerusalem happened first, then the scene in the temple a few days later. The donkey was a symbol that people of the times, versed in the teachings about Judaism, would recognize. It symbolized being a spiritual leader of religious reform, not the militant messiah (annointed one) that some sects of the times were expecting.

[The Jungle 1]

6. I prefer christofascism.

I believe what is being presented is fascism.
Religion has a seat at the table. They do not control the table. They must present a message Americans have faith in.
Like the republican party religion is crashing in America.

[Shipwack]

7. Similar to how Putin is supported by the Eastern Orthodox Church... nt

[KPN]

8. The article did nothing to assuage my inner fear

that we are headed for, or perhaps already confronted with America’s own Taliban. Bridging the divide between reasonable and fanatical by being patient, having empathy, listening more, educating as opposed to confronting, and calling in as opposed to calling out seems like a pipe-dream, nice to think about but unrealistic and in that sense, beyond naive. We might just as well play Beatles songs like “Love, Love, Love”, “Give Peace a Chance” everywhere incessantly and hope for the best.

Having said that. I am going to look into the book in the hope it has more to offer in helping to maintain an already rickety bridge between myself and a few of my 8 siblings. I’ll let you know if I discover anything that inspires a reason to hope.

[wnylib]

10. I share your fear and concern.

That is why the church's newsletter brought up the subject. I only quoted part of the newsletter, the part that quotes Pamela Cooper-White. I did not include other comments made in the newsletter because I had not checked with the pastor on whether he was ok with me sharing it.

The newsletter addressed strongly that Christian Nationalism is a misreading of the Gospels that harms both religion and democracy. Modern, progressive churches place great emphasis on Jesus' response to a question in the Gospels about which is the greatest commandment. Jesus answers that love is the greatest commandment and that all of the law and prophets are based on that. With love as the greatest and guiding commandment, the hatred expressed in Christian Nationalism is inconsistent with Jesus's teachings.

I also happen to know more about the thoughts of the pastor of that church regarding religious nationalism due to an adult religious education class that he led a few years ago. In that discussion, he brought up the distortions of Christianity that Nazis used in Germany, which led to many following the "German Christian Church" - a Nazi interpretation of religion. He talked about religious leaders who opposed the Nazi nationalist church, e g. Karl Barth (reformed Calvinism), and Martin Niemoller and Dietrich Bonhoeffer. - Lutheran "confessing church."

The newsletter called for active engagement in discrediting Christian Nationalism in the US. The quotes from Pamela Cooper-White were guides on how to engage in those discussions successfully in face to face encounters. Some die hard nationalists will not listen or engage in genuine discussion. But to reach others, it is necessary to listen to what they say and to not name call or put down. Hold firm against specious arguments but don't take a superiority stance that will not just turn them off, but will entrench them further in their beliefs. In other words, don't say, "You're wrong because you're a stupid fascist." Listen, and then offer your view, as a sincere duscussion. "That's interesting. I see it this way...." Or, "I especially like when Jesus says that love is the greatest commandment."

The goal is persuasion to undercut the nationalist influence and bring them out of the cult, not angry confrontation that drives them away or further into the cult.

What else are you expecting from the churches? They address this with the focus on the religious, spiritual issue that overlaps with politics. But the focus is more religious than political. If the churches make it a primarily political argument, then they become like the nationalists claiming to know what God wants for the country. Instead, when discussing the political angle, show them how religious freedom depends on keeping church and state separate. There are religious, theological points that support this separation of church and state.

If you are looking for the churches to pull out swords (or guns) and threaten Christian Nationalists that way, it ain't gonna happen.

[lees1975]

11. In a word, no.

Ignoring it, yes, addressing it, no. I'm sure its there, but so far the leadership has prevented it from becoming an issue.