The Case For Christian Nationalism: Review

Authors Intent

Stephen Wolfe is the author of The Case for Christian Nationalism. His intent, as he makes clear in the book, is to articulate the political thought behind the venture of Christian Nationalism. While he touches upon the theological foundations a bit, he makes a point to avoid making this work primarily about matters of religious doctrines.

In fact, he goes through early American history and some examples of religious influence in political life to demonstrate how to avoid sectarian specifics within the political movement. The type of Christian Nationalism for which he advocates would be one in which certainly the distinctions between Baptist and Presbyterian would not cause strife and it is likely even many Roman Catholics would find consensus on a majority of issues.

What To Expect

This book is great for those who have already been introduced to some of the positive discussion around the idea of Christian Nationalism and desire a more formal treatment of the topic. A person who has only heard primarily negative treatment of the topic could certainly benefit from an open-minded read of this book, but may struggle to associate what is presented in this book with how it has been treated in mainstream circles (sadly, including those in the church).

This book isn’t particularly long but a proper treatment of it would have one looking through many of the references he provides on every page. In some cases, nearly half of a page is used to provide sources for the claims made in the other half. He frequently depends upon citation of earlier Christian and political authors to make his points. The more familiar one is with the other sources and contexts from which quotes are being taken, the more beneficial this work becomes.

There were a number of works cited with which I was not familiar while I was reading it and, while I don’t mind someone expanding my future reading list, I was not able to get as much out of some of this book because I was having to take for granted that Wolfe was properly treated the contexts from which they were taken. Those citations with which I was familiar seemed like a fair representation, however.

Topics Discussed

He starts of the book discussing the relationship between human nature (as discussed in scripture) and how politics relates to this. He then moves into a defense of Nationalism and explaining how the idea of a “nation” has changed over time.

The work assumes the goodness of Christianity and therefore I don’t recall him spending much time on defending the idea that Christianity is a cultural good. However, he does address some objections people raise when it comes to concerns of the interactions between faith and politics. He discusses the temporal benefits a culture can experience as a result of both laws and Christian cultural influence, as well as how those temporal goods can incentivize those things which have eternal value (without promising politics as a means of eternal value).

The rest of the book is a closer look at America’s specific political circumstances and how Christians ought to respond in our unique position.

My Objection (Sort Of)

There was only one section which I found unconvincing. This is the section discussing the prelapsarian need for governing agents between neighbors. The claim is that conflicts between neighbors would be natural even without sin and that a third party with a vision for the common good is needed for resolution.

It seems possible that people completely lacking in selfishness and appealing to the same ultimate authority would be able to resolve such a conflict between themselves without a third party. My reasoning comes from the admonishments of Jesus and the apostles to work out conflict between yourself and a brother rather than including a court, assuming that it is possible to work out many issues even in a fallen world between two people in good faith.

He primarily seems to be discussing this topic to oppose the idea that governments are a necessary evil. Instead, he suggests that this is evidence that governments have always been required even pre-fall. I don’t believe governments are a necessary evil. However, scripture suggests governors are appointed by God because of evil.

From Proverbs to Romans, the role of government is primarily seen as the punishment of wrongdoing and the promotion of actions which serve the common good. Wolfe’s claim that the common good could be threatened by individual good without an arbiter who is better suited for discerning it, even in a morally perfect society, may be true. However, I don’t know that I have adequate evidence to agree with him for certain (not living in a morally perfect society and seeing most threat to the common good coming from sinfulness).

My Praise

The sections of this work that served as a great rebuke to me where regarding the good of cultural Christianity, the familiar, and the “Christian Prince”. There is much in this book that confronts the liberal norms we have been indoctrinated into by public schools, entertainment, and all of the other aspects of the godless side of American culture.

That godly living has great value for oneself and one’s neighbor in this life as well as eternity shouldn’t be a contested topic among Christians. However, secularists have worked tirelessly to convince us that our faith may be “good for us” but cannot be properly understood as simply good. I remember such claims even before people accepted the broader rise of the subjectivism we see on full display now. However, there is no question that the efforts of the former paved the way for post-modernist’s “my truth”.

Interestingly, at the same time when acceptance of subjective reality is on the rise, we have somehow been convinced that feeling greater responsibility for those closest to us and comfort in the familiar is a great evil. Even though each person can have his own “truth” we cannot have any loyalty to the heritage that is our own.

As Christians we must balance the reality of unique responsibilities for those closest to us (we have more responsibility to care for our own relatives than any random person in need, for instance [1 Timothy 5:8-16]) with the realization that there is no value in prejudice.

The Christian Prince is a title that gets a lot of attention and for all the wrong reasons. Many try to style what he’s advocating here as some sort of dictatorship. Instead, it is merely the recognition that a good leader should be one who inspires those under his authority to good! How we have been conditioned to accept the idea that we will always find our leaders distasteful and we should expect nothing less than the lowlife who will stop the other lowlife from being a greater lowlife!

The idea of a leader who inspires the people to good works is not foreign to most of us. We read about kings in scripture who lead the people into repentance and greater obedience to God, even pagan kings have led people to repent (just read Jonah)! However, we have been programmed to believe such a thing is an impossibility today. That to seek such a thing is foolhardy.

These sections were not only strong responses to some arguments against Christian Nationalism but a healthy wake up call to shake off some of the conditioning that still hung in the corners of my mind.

Overall, I strongly recommend that this be a read for anyone who wants a challenge to the basic political assumptions we have been fed by secular liberalism most of our lives. It may feel like a bit of a crawl for those not used to reading political theory but most Christians would find it helpful even if they never get involved in politics just understand how they relate in whatever place God has positioned them.