The Myth of the Christian Nation

Exodus 20:1-6 and Luke 4:1-8

Rev. Elizabeth Mangham Lott

October 23, 2022

For the 2nd of 3 sermons, I am making a detour from the weekly lectionary texts to talk about Christian Nationalism. Cliff’s Notes version: I’m against it, not for it. Why am I taking this much time to talk about a specifically American phenomenon in evangelical Christianity? Because I want you to have both awareness of a major theme in this upcoming election cycle and some rootedness in why I think that major theme is critical for us as people of faith and citizens of this nation. 

I acknowledge my bias in approaching each biblical text because I am the one selecting them each week, and I do not share the evangelical Christian Nationalist perspective that God has ordained the United States to be a Christian Nation which assumes all of our efforts as people of faith should be working toward that goal.

I will attempt today to point toward a couple of texts that Christian Nationalists use to support their perspective because, as we well know, the books before us-from Genesis to Revelation-can say pretty much anything we want them to say if we do not:

1. Interpret them in historical context of the time, culture, and language in which they were written. Sometimes comparing them to other religious and philosophical texts or rabbinic teachings of the same period to which those biblical texts were actually offering a counterpoint.

2. Follow overarching themes of scripture that repeat throughout history, prophetic teachings, poetry, stories, and letters.

3. Acknowledge EITHER inadequate information from the first two categories to fully understand a text in our 21st century, English-speaking, U.S. context OR to say honestly that a word being shared in a different time, different culture, different language is now problematic and must be challenged as we understand the love of God, fully revealed in Jesus the Christ. Easiest example of this would be texts that allow one to build a case for the enslavement of people as permissible, even blessed, by God. 

All of that to say, I approach biblical interpretation with caution, nuance, study, and curiosity. I do not read “THE BIBLE” as a monolithic document. I do not believe it was dictated by God. And I believe approaching this book as if it were written in English and as if it were meant to speak directly to 21st century, American, modern life without any additional effort at understanding is extremely dangerous.

To approach “THE BIBLE” as a singular document [as though it has no historical context (and denying it was formed as a canon by men with their own biases!) is how The Church has found itself as leader of all kinds of atrocities–from the Inquisition to African enslavement in the American colonies and early United States to present-day spiritual abuse of LGBTQ+ people.

As our baptismal liturgy reminds us, the fruit of our faith is the life we are living. Is our life marked by love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control? If the answer is no, then I think it’s mandatory we reconsider the ethics of our biblical interpretation. 

To carelessly approach biblical interpretation is how we come to statements like the one from Georgia Representative Green this past week who said, “We’re going to defeat Raphael Warnock, who calls himself a Christian, calls himself a pastor.” Raphael Warnock, of course, is a Senator from Georgia and has served as senior pastor of Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta since 2005. He is running for re-election to the U.S. Senate in the 2022 midterm elections.

The implication is that Pastor Warnock–standing in the pulpit where Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. once stood, educated at Morehouse College (BA) and Union Theological Seminary (MDiv, MPhil, PhD) is neither a real Christian nor a real pastor.

Professor, pastor, teacher Fred Craddock, whom some of you knew, once spoke “about the process of becoming a Christian at his church, [he] said, “People who come to join this church are not asked a lot of questions. We do not ask about gender or race or background and family connections. But we insist on asking one question: ‘Do you believe in the God who is revealed in Jesus?’”

I fully agree with Dr. Craddock. And also, I do not think it matters whether one is a person of deep faith or no faith in order for them to successfully serve in public office. While I think Representative Green is being divisive, ungracious, and dangerously unkind, I do not actually think either her faith or Pastor Warnock’s should be the qualifying factor for their eligibility to serve in public office.

But if one believes the U.S. is a Christian nation, to be governed by Christians with laws and standards and favor for Christians, then Rep. Green’s words suddenly bear more weight, don’t they?

I turn to the words of HOLLY HOLLMAN, General Counsel and Associate Executive Director for  BJC in Washington D.C. for a fuller reflection on the context for Green’s statement and the myth of the Christian nation. 

Demographically: the United States has been and continues to be a majority Christian nation. About 70% of Americans continue to identify as Christians (Pew). But that’s not typically what people are talking about when they say America is a Christian nation. Instead, they’re often claiming something about American history and law.

From a historical perspective, the United States was founded with a secular government, not a religious government. Those promoting the Christian nation narrative will point to the faith profiles of certain Founders and cherry-pick quotes from speeches and documents.

But the best proof that the Founders rejected state-sponsored religion is in the text of the Constitution itself. In the Article VI prohibition against religious tests for public office, and the First Amendment’s dual protections for religious freedom. Today, those promoting the Christian nation narrative argue that God has a special, providential role for the country, and that our laws should reflect Christian theology or sometimes “Judeo-Christian” values. This kind of thinking is both bad theology and bad law. It betrays the promise of religious freedom for all and would work to create second-class religions in this country, something that our Constitution prohibits.

The central guiding principle of this movement is the theology of dominion–pulled  primarily from Genesis 1:28 and Matthew 28:19:

Genesis 1:28–God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.”

Matthew 28:19–Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit

I would also add a 17th century reading of Matthew 5:14 “You are the light of the world. A city built on a hill cannot be hid.” This verse was cited at the end of Puritan John Winthrop's lecture "A Model of Christian Charity" delivered on March 21, 1630 as the first group of Massachusetts Bay colonists embarked on the ship Arbella to settle Boston. As Hollman noted of cherry-picking speeches and documents, Winthrop’s word to the puritan envoy is often conflated with the words of Jesus in Matthew 5 to point to the creation of the United States as distinctly Christian.

Christian Nationalists apply a narrow reading of those texts to undergird their belief in God’s establishing the United States as a Christian nation. Believing not just the founders of the United States, but the Divine had a chosen design for the United States to be the vehicle for spreading Christianity throughout the entire world.

Some of you may ask, “Why does any of this matter? This isn’t my experience of Christianity. My friends and family don’t believe any of this stuff. I’m not bothered by people who hold these different beliefs about the Christian faith.”

It matters because a significant part of the tension we have been feeling in church in the U.S. for years now is because of this perspective on what church is meant to be and how church is meant to be that for America. We have felt it in our own community when decades-long members left to find other worshiping communities who better affirmed their political viewpoints. We have felt it in families and neighborhoods when a sign or bumper sticker goes up or a sideways comment is made.

I’m trying to make the case that it’s not just a season of discomfort that rose and fell around the election of the 45th president of the United States. His election and ongoing support has been completely enmeshed in white evangelical Christian Nationalism, and that movement is not over. It has not disappeared. This is the movement behind gerrymandering, behind stacking the courts, behind redefining coerced prayer in public schools, behind the statement “I couldn’t vote for her because I had to think about the Supreme Court,” behind the ongoing attack on public schools for all. Take your pick.

Maybe I sound histrionic here. Maybe I sound like I’m part of conspiracy theories on the other side. But I truly do believe that a central part of my role in continuing to serve as a Christian pastor is to dissent and push back against this dominant, prominent embodiment of Christianity.

To that point, in his book Christians Against Christianity, Obery M. Hendricks, Jr., writes, “What is seldom voiced outside [Christian Nationalist] circles is that the eventual goal of right-wing evangelical leaders is to force every aspect of American life to genuflect at the altar of their narrow brand of Christianity. In actuality, then, they are not only right-wing evangelical Christian nationalists, they are also Christian supremacists…[D]estroying abortion rights, rolling back the newly granted federal protections of the constitutional rights of gay Americans, and recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel” to expedite Christ’s return are part of Christian dominion.

As I look at our gospel reading today of Jesus’ temptation in the wilderness, I read a caution central to Christ’s ministry: 

5 Then the devil[a] led him up and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. 6 And the devil[b] said to him, “To you I will give all this authority and their glory, for it has been given over to me, and I give it to anyone I please. 7 If you, then, will worship me, it will all be yours.” 8 Jesus answered him, “It is written, ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve only him.’ ”

The temptation to embrace and rule over all the kingdoms of the world is at odds with the message and mission of Jesus. 

In Matthew’s gospel, chapter 22, we read: 

Then the Pharisees went and plotted to entrap him in what he said. 16 So they sent their disciples to him, along with the Herodians, saying, “Teacher, we know that you are sincere, and teach the way of God in accordance with truth, and show deference to no one, for you do not regard people with partiality. 17 Tell us, then, what you think. Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar or not?” 18 But Jesus, aware of their malice, said, “Why are you putting me to the test, you hypocrites? 19 Show me the coin used for the tax.” And they brought him a denarius. 20 Then he said to them, “Whose head is this and whose title?” 21 They answered, “Caesar’s.” Then he said to them, “Give therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s.” 22 When they heard this, they were amazed, and they left him and went away.

The trap would be either blasphemy against the one true God and the Exodus mandate Sarah read earlier:

“I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery; 3 you shall have no other gods before[a] me. 4 “You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above or that is on the earth beneath or that is in the water under the earth. 5 You shall not bow down to them or serve them”

Or it would be disastrous treason to speak against the self-identified “god” title that the Caesar took upon himself. In Jesus’ reply to this either/or dichotomy, he replies that the two are requiring totally separate things of a person. What is of Caesar is not of God. And what is of God is not of Caesar.

Whether the people of God find themselves in Babylon or New Zealand, the Roman Empire or the United States, the shape of embodied faith is the same. Let Caesar do what Caesar does, but that is not what shapes our faith. Is it loving? Is it kind? Is it patient? Does it foster peace? Is it generous? Is it gentle? Is it faithful? Does it exhibit self-control? These are the questions to be asking about our lives. 

And if we are embodying a faith like, then of course it will naturally inform our political action and involvement in the very same way Jesus meant when he said:
‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the greatest and first commandment. 39 And a second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”

Maybe Rep. Green wouldn’t consider me to be a Christian or a pastor, either. I should be so lucky to be in the company of Pastor Warnock! I should be so lucky to live a life fully committed to the love of God, the love of neighbor, and the love of my own complicated self that I am marked and labeled by it forever. 

It’s my hope and my prayer for you, too. May your lives be shaped by the love of God as we know it in the person of Christ. May your love for neighbor extend to the atheist, the agnostic, the Muslim, the Buddhist, the Scientologist, and the Christian Nationalist just as easily and readily as it does for people who fit your own personal way of being. And may the kindness and patience and generosity you extend to others be the same that you extend to your very self. That’s quite enough work to take up a lifetime. May that be our work and our goal, in all things. Amen.