In Defense of Christian Patriotism and the Nature of the Religious Right

How should we understand our Christian obligation toward our nation? Daniel Darling, author of In Defense of Christian Patriotism, reminds us that we need the virtue of prudence to navigate politics in a fallen world where there are no utopian solutions. Darling seems keenly aware of the binary temptations believers will face and weaves a path through each with care: neither to retreat from politics nor be obsessed with it, neither to idolize our country nor condemn it.

The Distinction Between Patriotism and Nationalism

Patriotism is a duty of all citizens across the world. To borrow from Thomas Aquinas, love is the persistent will for the good of the other—the genuine good, not the perceived one. Just as we have duties to love our families and neighborhoods, we ought to love our countries as well. However, we must differentiate between the real and the overblown threat of Christian nationalism. The problem with Christian nationalism is not that it is (or claims to be) Christian but that it is nationalist.

• Nationalism: Claims superiority for one’s own people and place over all others.
• Patriotism: Understands our own love and loyalty as compatible with that of other people’s love and loyalty to their own nations.

To love my own nation is not to discount another’s any more than loving my own family means discounting other families. As illustrated by the story of Jonah, who still wanted Nineveh destroyed after they had repented, he was a nationalist, not a patriot—and a stubborn one at that.

The Duty of Political Engagement

Christians have a duty to engage in politics despite its messiness. What happens if the salt of the earth loses its saltiness? Even when our own country is spiritually failing, we must love it the way God commanded the Hebrews in exile to love their Babylonian city and work for its good (Jer. 29:7). Our exhaustion from the bad behavior of our parties or politicians does not excuse us from voting thoughtfully, running for office, and helping to shape policy. Christians of influence can help to preserve what might otherwise rot.

The Historical Evolution of the Religious Right

The context of this engagement has shifted significantly over time. Prior to the late 1970s, evangelical Christians rarely took an active interest in national politics. The 1960s counterculture and civil rights movements changed the cultural dynamic of the Country. Later, the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision on abortion galvanized a few outspoken conservatives of a need for political action. Jerry Falwell started a political organization called the Moral Majority in 1979, contributing to the rise of a strong voter base that is conservative, evangelical, and almost religiously Republican.

The Shift in Environmental Views

In his work The Nature of the Religious Right, Neall W. Pogue provides a counter narrative to the idea that conservative Christians were hostile to the environmental movement from the outset. During the late 1960s and early 1970s, the Evangelical community discussed the subject and developed an eco-friendly view that Christians could help save the Earth. Many pastors and leaders saw the ecological problems as a result of humanities deviation from Gods laws.

Table: Development of Christian Political and Social Focus

However, the strong anti-environment and even anti-science rhetoric of the religious right did not gain traction until the early 1990s. Anti-environmentalism arose primarily from political arguments rather than theological ones. Political conservatives convinced many Christians to give up their creation stewardship ideas by arguing that all environmentalists were pagan, earth worshiping extremists despite little evidence. Many conservative Christians not only abandoned their creation stewardship ideology, but also turned against it.