There is a long rich and shadowed history of the influence of religion in social and political life. It actually precedes the rise of Christianity in the first century of the common era. Before Constantine became the first Christian emperor in the early 4th century and began that peculiar commingling of religion and politics, the civilizations of the Ancient Near East had already perfected their own; the Mesopotamian, Persian, Chinese, Indian, Egyptian, Jewish, Greek and Roman empires were all seamless amalgamations of religious worldviews and civic communal order and structure.
In the cultures of antiquity, religion was a way of viewing and assessing the world—the cosmos, the culture, the community, the individual, all bounded by a mysterious and transcendent realm inhabited by the deity or deities who may or may not be supernatural. Perhaps its most important function was to bring some order and sense to that world and its social microcosm; the observable world and the experience of it all needed to be made intelligible.
But we need to take a deeper dive into this matter of religion in ancient cultures in order to get an idea of how religion-in-society functioned then, so we have some reference for how some forms of it are attempting to function now. Then as now, we must think of “religion” as the wide-ranging social obligations a member of society had towards family and others, especially towards rulers overseeing the socioeconomic and political order, and ultimately towards the inhabitant(s) of the divine realm. The expressiveness of one’s religiosity is thus one’s conduct seen as indicative of the acknowledgment of and reverence for the divine powers and the intent to honor and propitiate them.
In ancient civilizations and cultures, religion served as a central organizing force interweaving the social, moral, kinship, educational, economic, and political patterns into a coherent and holistic cultural system. In a pre-scientific world, religion provided explanations for natural phenomena, the origin of the universe, and human existence. It offered creation myths, stories about gods and goddesses, and cosmologies that helped people understand their place in the world.
Through its rituals and stories as well as its teachings, religion provided moral codes and ethical frameworks that structured daily activity and relationships, thereby establishing the ethical norms that regulated behavior and promoted social cohesion. One might even say, anachronistically, that the shared rituals, ceremonies and beliefs provided individuals with a personal and social identity and sense of belonging in and solidarity with a community.
Ancient civilizations had complex systems of religious rituals and practices performed to honor deities, seek blessings, ensure fertility, mark rites of passage, and maintain harmony with the divine realm. Participation in religion was a publicly observable thing as it meant that one came to a temple or shrine or other holy place and made offerings of ointment, incense, food, drink, clothing, or flowers, anything of meaning and value that could be made use of by the priests or priestesses, monks or monarchs, rulers or rajahs.
The recognition of one’s membership in the community entailed the offering of sacrifices (typically of farm animals, but in some religions, humans), prayers for help, safety and protection from the forces of darkness and evil as well as gratitude to the deity or pantheon of deities for founding and maintaining the cosmic and social order. Such religious activities were notable especially at the festivals celebrating the god(s), and there were sacred spaces in one’s domicile to make offerings of prayer and thanksgiving regularly and intimately. Living with others in a social world designed and bounded by cosmic and divine orders made it possible for individuals to discern their “place” and their “role” in the world.
Some religions in antiquity embodied the notion of an afterlife in some form and the veneration of ancestors was common. People sought to secure a favorable afterlife through religious practices, and ancestral worship played a role in maintaining familial connections and seeking guidance from the deceased. It was, in its own way, an ancient form of what the great Greek philosophers called the scala naturae, or scale of nature, that connected all forms of life from the animal realm to the divine realm.
In many ancient civilizations, religious leaders held significant political authority and power. Rulers by any title often claimed divine authority which was legitimized through religious narratives and the institutions that amassed and controlled great wealth and resources including land and its produce. Sanctuaries, shrines, and temples and their religious officiants were closely tied to political structures and could be said to be major if not primary economic engines with their oversight of buying, selling and lending as well as their funding of public works.
Religion also had educational and archival functions in as much as it served as a repository of knowledge; religious institutions played a role in preserving religious and historical records. The official religionists often were the community’s educators and keepers of the culture’s learning and wisdom; priests and gurus were responsible for maintaining, preserving, and transmitting sacred texts and myths as well as other forms of knowledge.
Now let’s fast-forward a few millennia to today and consider one form of religion in public life.
It is an indication that something significant is happening in the public square when that something is the subject of an increasing number of news reports, magazine articles, scholarly books and articles in professional peer-reviewed journals. But that is what’s happening with the subject of Christian nationalism, a blending of religion and politics the goal of which is revision of our sociocultural order and return to the dominance of religion in the public square. The attention being drawn to it is a good thing because its threat can empower us to gird up our loins to challenge and eliminate it.
Christian nationalism refers to a political and cultural ideology that combines elements of the religion of Christianity with the idea of a nation-state. Supporters of this view believe that the foundation and identity of a nation should be rooted in a particular interpretation of Christian faith and values, and that law and public policy should align with their particular understanding of Christianity. Because of this belief, adherents advocate for the legitimacy of a dominant Christian influence in society, politics, education, and culture.
Certainly Christian nationalism is not representative of all Christians or denominations, either historically or at present. But a recent study by the Public Religion Research Institute and the Brookings Institution has shown that 29% of Americans are supporters or sympathizers of this ideology, as are two-thirds of evangelical Christians. (A study done by Pew Research Center reports that 60% of adults in the U.S. believe that the nation’s founders originally intended for this to be a “Christian nation,” but only 33% believe that it is one now.)
Typically proponents of this view believe that the U.S. should be legally recognized as a Christian nation and should prioritize the interests and values of Christians above those of other religious or secular groups, arguing for the infusion of religious symbolism, prayers, or teachings in public spaces and institutions, including schools and government buildings. The objective of their advocacy is to shape legislation and public policy in accordance with their interpretation of Christian morality, especially on such issues as reproductive rights, LGBTQ+ rights, critical race theory, book censorship, public education, and religious freedom.
In this manner, the devotees of the Christian nationalist ideology and agenda would return us to a fusion of religion and society and the blending of religious and political institutions once seen in ancient civilizations.
In an era of extreme social and political polarization, the question of whether our politics, culture, and civilization need reform is a pressing one. Christian nationalists and their sympathizers are committed to the notion that our democracy needs to conform to Christian values and principles and reclaim the privileged position of heterosexual marriage and the male-headed family, the right to life for the unborn, the durability of the sex assigned at birth, and Christian-centered education. It is this melding of Christianity and democracy that suggests that one must be a Christian in order to live and thrive in, as well as contribute to the strength of, this democratic republic. Christian civilization, in its American iteration, is the normative culture, the water we swim in. So Christian nationalists claim.
I think this is wrong-headed and misguided. There is great need for reform, absolutely. But I do not believe it is our democracy, its institutions, or its civil, social, and moral values that need reform. Rather, it is Christianity that needs reform, as least that brand of it that animates the ideology of Christian nationalism. I believe that this brand of Christianity should conform to the values and principles of our democracy.
Rather than a religious interpretation of democracy, let’s try a democratic interpretation of religion. If the “religion” of Christianity is paired with the “political system” of democracy, then let the reform movement that is so needed at present move from the political to the religious.
The church emerged and developed for its first sixteen centuries in the political context of authoritarian imperialism with the consequence that its very structure reflected this imperialist bent. This ethos is embodied in Christian nationalism. Reforming Christianity to conform to democracy would mean maximizing human freedom, self-determination, human interests and aspirations in religion.
What might this brand of Christianity have to learn in the twenty-first century from democratic values and principles?
Certainly the relationship between democracy and Christianity is complex. The impact of democratic principles vary depending on cultural and historical contexts. But we don’t live in the first century of the common era, or the middle ages when the Catholic church and the monarchical state were coterminous, or the sixteenth century era of the Protestant Reformation, or the age of even seventeenth-century Puritanism and European colonial expansion. Rather, we live on this side of the Enlightenment and the scientific, industrial, and technological revolutions. Repristinating any of these older cultures and their attendant forms of the Christian religion out of adherence to a supposedly pure and pristine religious and cultural era is not feasible or desirable. In this vein, it is as Ernest Griffith stated in his contribution to a symposium on Cultural Prerequisites to a Successfully Functioning Democracy: “loyalty to the past isn’t enough; it lacks context.” Our context in this country at this time is infinitely removed from any ancient Rome or Puritan America.
Democracy can teach Christian nationalists the democratic principles of equality and dignity of all individuals, and inspire them to inculcate inclusivity in their communities and value the diverse voices and perspectives. These principles encourage Christians to treat each other with respect, regardless of social status, gender, race, or other characteristics. It is, after all, a principle embedded in, but in great need of recall and reform within, the tradition of Christianity with the notion of imago dei and its emphasis on the equal worth of all people.
Democracy upholds the principles of freedom of belief and conscience as fundamental rights. These values can influence Christian nationalists to respect individual autonomy, allowing others also to interpret their sacred literature and tradition and the practices of their faith according to their conscience. The American patriot Thomas Paine, a scornful and trenchant critic of Christianity, wrote in the preface to his book, The Age of Reason, “I have always strenuously supported the Right of every man to his opinion, however different that opinion might be to mine. He who denies to another this right, makes a slave of himself to his present opinion, because he precludes himself the right of changing it.” These democratic principles enable open and reasonable dialogue, the exploration of different social, political and theological perspectives, and the acceptance of a variety of human cultural and religious practices. No one controls the market on truth, no matter how misguidedly sanctioned it may appear to be by religious sentiments.
Democracy promotes the participation of citizens in shaping society and advocating for justice. Quoting again patriot Paine, in the above referenced book: “I believe that religious duties consist in doing justice, loving mercy, and endeavouring to make our fellow creatures happy” (my emphasis, not his!). It is not unreasonable to propose that Christian nationalists remember that the democratic values of compassion, love, and concern for those who suffer are also endemic to the traditions of Christianity. The story of democracy, at least on its brightest side, is the story of pursuing social justice, promoting human rights, and contesting the systemic issues of poverty, discrimination, and inequality.
Because democracies consist of communities that are socially, economically and demographically diverse, it should come as no surprise that they are also religiously diverse. Pluralism is a democratic value, and in our context this value can foster intergroup and interreligious dialogue and cooperation. Democracy can teach Christian nationalists the importance of mutual respect, understanding, and collaboration on shared societal issues; it can instruct us all in where, when, and how to promote peace and harmony in ways that acknowledge our diversity and yet bind us together in community. Just as democracy is a polity in which the citizens are themselves the deciders and critics of the autocratic rule by leaders, so religion ought to be attuned to the hopes, needs, and cries of all who inhabit the realm, not just the favored few.
In a piece entitled “Democracy – A Christian Imperative,” the Lutheran-turned-Roman Catholic cleric and former editor of First Things, Richard John Neuhaus wrote:
It is of the utmost importance to emphasize that democracy is not simply a sentiment, it is not simply an attitude of openness, it is the institutionalization of that sentiment and attitude. True, democracy depends upon more than institutions. It requires what might be called the habits of democracy to make those institutions work. But the absence of the habits or traditions of democracy must not be used as an excuse for anti-democratic government. Rather, one must work at establishing the institutions and then nurturing the habits by which the institutions can be made effective [again, my emphasis, not his].
In similar fashion, in his essay, “Christianity and Democracy,” legal scholar, John Witte, Jr., refers to democracy as “a system of distinctive social and political ideas and institutions.” He then goes on to describe these ideas:
The cardinal social ideas of democracy are equality and freedom, pluralism and toleration. Democracy confirms the individuality and equality of persons and their inherent freedoms of life, belief, and expression. It confirms the diversity of persons and tolerates diverse values, convictions, and life-styles. It confirms the interdependence of persons and protects the freedoms of family, church, school, and other associations. It confirms the capacity and responsibility of persons to govern and ensures their participation in the public square, their representation in the political process, and their access to political offices and officials.
Democracy has much to teach the Christian religion in general, and Christian nationalism in particular, about these cardinal social ideas. And yes, Christianity can contribute to the social, economic, political embodiment of the virtues enumerated through the centuries by religionists and free-thinkers, the pious and the pragmatic, lowly and lofty saints and scientists. Though the list be long, there have been ancestors, religious and patriotic, who have shown us goodness and kindness, humility and compassion, patience and diligence, courage and resolve, friendship and mutual affection, tolerance and self-control, knowledge and wisdom, duty and loyalty, and of course, justice (emphasis mine).
Christian nationalism must be resisted; Christian nationalists must be instructed. We would indeed do well to work together, right now, to make religion safe for democracy. There is no other way that assures that all may thrive in seeking and finding their own well-being as citizens of our nation.
