So far this series of articles has covered the places where Christians Nationalism hits on something good, which has been described as the fairway of political theory. It has also given examples of different areas where it is controversial, seen as the rough. However, those associated with Christian Nationalism have also created their fair share of water hazards. These are the places where ideas and the way ideas are wielded are against God’s word, the plot is lost, and the game is over. These ideas are often not included as the core beliefs of Christian Nationalism, and yet certain self-proclaimed Christian Nationalists promote and promulgate very troubling views which rise to the level of grave concern and requires forceful rebuke when taught by Christians.
There is a growing controversy in the conservative church, and it has to do with race. It is a strange phenomenon, though perhaps it ought not to be surprising. Only a few years ago I was writing articles against the racial reconciliation movement in the PCA.[1]That movement, intentionally or not, saddled all white people with the sins of the present and past of all people of the same skin color. That is the progressive excess in the area of racial difference. Currently, the conservative movement, political and Christian, is manifesting its own excesses in the area of race: the separation of people into ethnic and racial categories as a primary way of identifying and assessing them. There are rising instances of Kinism, assertions of racial superiority in so-called “race realism,” anti-Jewish language, anti-semitism, holocaust denial, and Hitler rehabilitation. This problem is not yet as mainstream as the racial reconciliation assertions were when at their peak, however these views are moving in that direction among many conservative minded people.
I would be considered a Gen Xer, though I think broad categorizations of generations actually play into the hand of the problem at hand. However, I bring it up to say I grew up in the 1970s and 80s. I grew up in a world where ethnic stereotypes were much more common. Today’s forbidden ethnic slurs were used quite liberally among people during that time. There were no words that were forbidden in all contexts, or words that could not be spoken at all. However, there was a recognition that using these words was not right in certain contexts, whereas today’s version of racial excess among conservatives does not blush over its verbal ethnic epithets. That is not to suggest the approach in the 70s and 80s was ideal. I am simply pointing out there is a greater insensitivity in today’s climate.
Progression of Problems
So how did it happen that five years ago the church was under the unhealthy progressive racial excesses, but now the same problem is rising in the conservative camp? I am not a sociologist. I am a pastor. At best my opinions in this area should be seen as hunches and guesses and not scientifically established and researched thoughts.
First, I think there is a reaction among ethnic white young men to being told on a regular basis that the ills of the past are their fault. They have been marginalized in terms of their voice because of the color of their skin and the fact that they are male. It seems to me they have simply adopted the label that has been given to them. If they are blamed for everything, they may as well embrace it, or so the reasoning goes.
Second, there is also a reaction to perceptions (real or imagined) that institutions which should have spoken truth, in fact did not. Especially reporting about how the Center for Disease Control handled COVID-19 and the dishonesty that was perpetrated concerning the significance and origins of the illness and the reliability of the various forms of the vaccines greatly undermined trust in a significant institution. Understanding that there is disagreement about the veracity of these subjects, I simply raise them as a point of reference. Agreement with the skepticism is not required to be able to recognize that the events themselves have created doubt in large sections of people regarding whether institutions in general can be trusted.
Third, the influence of mass migration in Europe and illegal immigration in the United States has awakened a sense of protection of the natural citizens of these nations. Visiting the Netherlands this past May, it was not uncommon to hear the complaint that housing was not available to young Dutch families because inventory had dwindled to nothing because of the large influx of foreign people into their country. For the United States, the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think-tank, claims that 6.7 million illegal immigrants have come to the US since 2021.[2] Argue with the number if you will, but it is not hard to see how loyal American citizens would see such an influx as a threat to their culture. These are the hunches of a man who speaks regularly to people who voice those kinds of complaints. However, perhaps it is better to let the motivation for the shift be explained by others. My aim here is more to examine the vehicle through which they have often come: Christian Nationalism. Again, not all proponents are lobbing balls into the water hazards. For example, Stephen Wolfe does not seem to be a racialist, a man who sees the world in racial categories, and yet there is lack of clarity on this point in his signature work on the subject.
In Stephen Wolfe’s book, The Case for Christian Nationalism, he introduces the idea of the ethnicity of a nation without clearly defining it. For example, he says, “The instinct to live within one’s ‘tribe’ or one’s own people is neither a product of the fall nor extinguished by grace; rather it is natural and good.”[3] And he presents an order of loves that, on its face, seems appropriate: “A Christian should love his children over other children, his parents over other parents, his kin over other kin, his nation over other nations.”[4] And yet, it is in the confusion of terminology and lack of clarity in definition that Wolfe leaves himself open.
For example, when describing ethnicity, he says, “Ethnicity, as something experienced, is familiarity with others based in common language, manners, customs, stories, taboos, rituals, calendars, social expectations, duties, loves, and religion.”[5] In this case any mention of a racial component is left out, and yet he spends the next few pages in his book arguing for a common “volksgeist” (which, I have to admit, is a curious choice of term in light of Germany’s use of a similar term in the 1930s and 40s) that is derived from “blood relations.” Because of his lack of clarity, the door is opened for misunderstanding. And yet, lack of clarity hardly allows for a guilty verdict. However, there are others within Chrisitan Nationalism who have clearly stated positions on Kinism, race-realism, and anti-semitism. These are most definitely water hazards and should be addressed.
Pastor Geoff Gleason
Cliffwood Presbyterian Church
—————
[1] Geoff Gleason, “An Appeal on Race in the Presbyterian Church in America,” six-part series, Theology in Shorts, 2021, first installment published August 3, 2021, https://theologyinshorts.com/part-1-an-appeal-on-race-in-the-presbyterian-church-in-america/.
[2] “The Biden Administration Has Brought in an Additional 6.7 Million Illegal Aliens,” Heritage Foundation, accessed November 21, 2025, https://www.heritage.org/border-security/report/the-biden-administration-has-brought-additional-67-million-illegal-aliens.
[3] Stephen Wolfe, The Case for Christian Nationalism, (Moscow, Idaho: Canon Press, 2022), 23.
[4] Stephen Wolfe, The Case for Christian Nationalism, 101.
[5] Stephen Wolfe, The Case for Christian Nationalism, 136.