Christian Nationalism: Is There a Better Way?

This article is adapted from MARSCAST Episode 256

The ongoing debates concerning Christian nationalism have animated discussions within Reformed and Evangelical circles, compelling many to consider whether such a movement provides an appropriate framework for engaging culture and politics. The question before us is whether Christian nationalism, as it is presently articulated, offers a biblically and confessionally sound approach or whether the Reformed confessions themselves sufficiently address the issues at hand. Dr. Alan Strange, Professor of Church History at Mid-America, argues that the latter is true: the historic confessions of the Reformed tradition, as amended through careful ecclesiastical deliberation, are sufficient for engaging contemporary society.

The Development of Reformed Thought on Church and State

The Reformed tradition has never been static; rather, it has developed over centuries as the church has sought to apply biblical principles to changing historical contexts. Dr. Strange points to modifications made to the Belgic Confession, particularly Article 36, within American Presbyterianism and other Reformed bodies as evidence of this ongoing theological refinement. These amendments reflect a shift away from a Constantinian model of church-state relations toward a more developed understanding of the church’s spiritual independence and its engagement with civil society.

Dr. Strange also highlights the theological contributions of Charles Hodge, who exemplified this trajectory. Hodge’s reflections illustrate how the Reformed tradition has increasingly distanced itself from older models of Christendom, in which civil authorities enforced religious orthodoxy. Such a perspective, Strange contends, is not a capitulation to modern liberalism but a biblically faithful progression that maintains the church’s integrity while recognizing the prudential nature of political arrangements.

The Dangers of a Nostalgic Retrieval

Some advocates of Christian nationalism seek to retrieve a past era in which Christianity ostensibly held cultural and political sway. However, Dr. Strange argues that this approach is fraught with problems. The notion that one can simply repristinate the 17th or 18th century fails to account for both the doctrinal development within the Reformed tradition and the realities of the present cultural moment. While historical retrieval is valuable, it must be undertaken with discernment. Theology does not advance merely by looking backward; instead, it develops through careful exegesis, confessional fidelity, and an awareness of historical context.

Moreover, Dr. Strange emphasizes that the Bible does not provide a detailed, divinely ordained blueprint for the structuring of civil society. While biblical principles certainly inform political and economic thinking, the precise mechanisms of governance remain matters of prudence. This is why Reformed Christians, working within the same confessional commitments, may arrive at different conclusions regarding political and economic policies.

He further warns against the belief that civil governance should enforce Christian doctrine, arguing that attempts to do so historically have often resulted in ecclesiastical and societal strife. While Christianity undoubtedly shapes a believer’s moral and ethical outlook, the church’s mission is primarily spiritual, focusing on the proclamation of the gospel and the discipleship of believers.

Seeking First the Kingdom in a Pluralistic Society

Dr. Strange notes that Christians today must navigate an increasingly pluralistic society. This does not mean retreating into cultural isolation or forsaking the public square, but it does mean that engagement must be marked by wisdom and charity. He underscores the importance of maintaining a clear distinction between the church’s spiritual mission and the role of the civil magistrate. Christians are called to bear witness to Christ’s kingdom, recognizing that no political order will ever bring about the eschatological renewal that only Christ’s return will accomplish.

Public engagement, Strange contends, must be characterized by love for God and neighbor. He argues that Christians should seek to persuade, rather than coerce; to reason, rather than demand. If culture is unwilling to heed the wisdom of Christian principles, the task is not to impose but to remain faithful, to work and pray for a better day. He points out that history demonstrates that societies fluctuate in their openness to Christian truth and that believers must remain steadfast regardless of the prevailing cultural winds.

The Church’s Priority: Spiritual Vitality Over Political Influence

Before discussions about transforming society take precedence, Dr. Strange stresses the necessity of attending to the church’s spiritual health. He reminds us that judgment begins in the house of the Lord. In many respects, he argues, the contemporary church is in need of spiritual renewal far more than it is in need of political influence. If the church is to be faithful in its cultural witness, it must begin with a deepened commitment to the confessions, a robustly biblical spirituality, and a church that truly embodies the gospel in both doctrine and life.

Dr. Strange critiques the tendency among some evangelicals to prioritize political engagement over ecclesial faithfulness. He cautions against an undue fixation on cultural dominance, noting that the church's primary role is not to establish a Christianized nation but to call sinners to repentance and faith in Christ. There are many historical examples where the church’s integrity was compromised when it became overly entangled with political power, leading to distortions of its mission and message.

Furthermore, Strange warns that calls for Christian nationalism often result in unnecessary divisions within the church. Even among Reformed believers, there is no monolithic agreement on how Christian principles should inform civil governance. He observes that attempts to enforce a singular political vision under the guise of Christian fidelity can fracture ecclesiastical unity and distract from the church’s primary mission.

Conclusion: The True Christian Hope

In conclusion, Dr. Strange asserts that Christians should not be distracted by movements that promise cultural ascendancy apart from true spiritual renewal. The church’s witness is most effective when it remains centered on Christ and His kingdom rather than attempting to secure political victories. He urges believers to fix their eyes on Christ, the author and finisher of faith, who alone brings the kingdom in its fullness.

Rather than striving to establish a golden age of Christian rule, he calls for faithfulness in the present age, bearing witness to the gospel in word and deed. The ultimate hope for believers is not in any earthly political arrangement but in the new heavens and new earth, where righteousness dwells. Until that day, the church is to remain steadfast, seeking first the kingdom of God and trusting in His sovereign plan.