Putting paid to "Christian" nationalism

It can be said, with more than a little justification, that "Christian" nationalism is nothing more than white nationalism in Bible drag. But the issue is more complex than that, and starkly reveals exactly why the Founders erected a wall between church and state.

While the term has been in use since the 1800's, it took on new significane in 2015 with the rise of Donald Trump, and the enthusiastic support of that rise by self-styled evangelical "Christians". I use "Christians" parenthetically as I find that these "Christians" pay little more than lip-service to the teachings of Christ. Their support for Trump is rooted in the mistaken assumption that...despite decades of debauchery and depravity...he somehow shares their values. Which leads me to question exactly what their values are.

To support their claims that America is a Christian nation founded, not upon the historical records and writings of the Founders regarding the religiousity, or lack thereof, but rather the historical fantasies created by people like Mason Locke Weems (1759-1825) for no other purpose than the selling of his tracts and books. And, as the years went on, other...equally scurrilous individuals...embellished on, and wrote their own equally fantastical versions of a "Christian" America.

We really don't need to look further than two documents, Paul's Epistle to the Romans, and the Declaration of Independence.

In his letter Paul states,

"Being Subject to Authorities Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same..."

In it, he basically establishes the divine right of kings in stating "the powers that be (rulers) are ordained of God", and to resist or rebel against them is to resist or rebel against God.

Bearing this statement of Paul's in mind, had Washington, Jefferson, Frankllin, Adams, and other of the Founders been Bible thumping believers, the Thirteen Colonies would never have broken ties with England and King George, as the Loyalists of the day wished. The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution would never have been written, and America would never have been.

If we look instead to the Declaration of Independence, ignoring the vague and wooly verbiage about the "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God", being endowed of "certain inalienable rights" by their "Creator", we can get to the meat of the matter.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. (emphasis mine)"

Note the difference between Paul's Epistle and the Declaration of Independence - "Governments are instituted among men" and "derive their just powers from the consent of the governed" and, when the government becomes despotic, authoritarian and repressive, it is not only the right of the governed, but their duty, to throw off that yoke of oppression.

The difference between the servility demanded of the governed by Paul and the independence and refusal to submit to such slavish servility as set forth in teh Declaration of Independence is stark, yet that language of servility is used by "Christian" nationalists to legitimize and justify Donald Trump's despotic and authoritarian tendencies. Paula White, Trump's "spiritual" advisor uses that language vividly in her support of Trump.

"They say about our President, 'Well he is not Presidential.' Thank goodness...he is not a polished politician. In other words, he is authentically - whether people like it or not - has been raised up by God. Because God says that He raises up and places all people in places of authority. It is God who raises up a king. It is God who sets one down. When you fight against the plan of God, you are fighting against the hand of God."

Folks, that is the "Divine Right of Kings". America will have no kings.

Nowhere in the Bible will you find "the consent of the governed" as a prerequisite for governance anymore than you will find the notion of all of us being "created equal". That is found in the Declaration of Independence. The Bible calls for slavish servility to a ruler annointed by God. It is that servility "Christian" nationalists would impose. A servility that was alien to the Founders and and as repugnant, here and now, as it was then. It is a servility Donald Trump and his kakistocracy yearn for. This demand by "Christian" nationalists, Trump and his kakistocracy for this level of servility is profoundly un-American. "Christian" nationalism is the poisonous fruit of the union of politics and religion...a union the Founders knew could destroy the Republic.