Talk:Christian nationalism/Archive 1

Archive 1

Suggested Direction for this Article

This seems like an important topic. But the article is really weak. I can't imagine that there isn't a whole scholarly debate about what Christian Nationalism might mean that isn't reflected in the article being presented.Let's start there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrainUnboxed2020 (talk • contribs) 02:02, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Recent edits

User:Webmgr, your edits were reverted by User:NatGertler and I have also reverted them as well. Your contributions are largely sourced to pressure groups critical of an accommodationist position. These would not qualify as reliable sources, nor are they neutral or appropriate to add here. Additionally, the reference to pro-slavery theologians is with respect to the origins of the Christian right, not Christian nationalism. You may want to add the sentence to that article rather than here, as it would be more appropriate there. I hope this helps. With regards, Anupam^Talk 05:50, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

The lead sentences fail verification

The current lead says:

Christian nationalism is Christianity-affiliated religious nationalism. Christian nationalists primarily focus on internal politics, such as passing laws that reflect their view of Christianity and its role in political and social life. In countries with a state Church, Christian nationalists, in seeking to preserve the status of a Christian state, uphold an antidisestablishmentarian position.

In support, three sources are offered:

1. This news report from "religionnews.com" which reports a letter recently published by a group of Christian leaders. This seems to me not to be RS for this content.
2. This opinion piece from Comment Magazine which does not contain the expression 'Christian Nationalism' and thus does not support the content in the lead.
3. This book by Charles Bloomberg, published in 1990, which is about something he calls "Christian-Nationalism" (with a hyphen), which he describes as A systematic body of closely-woven ideas, Christian-Nationalism incorporates (a) the idea of the 'chosen-people-with-a-sacred mission', and (b) the Right's stress on authority, hierarchy, discipline, privilege and elitist leadership, as well as glorification of God, nation, family, blood and the cult of force. It couples this with a rejection of liberalism, Marxism, 'sickly sentimental humanism' and the equality of humankind regardless of race. This seems to me a useful gloss on what he takes "Christian-Nationalism" to be. But, first, is Christian-Nationalism in his sense the topic of this article? Second, his definition says nothing about "focus on internal politics" or "social life" or "ant establishmentarian," and so does not support the current lead sentences in the article.

In short, then, the lead sentences fail verification. Is anyone aware of sources that support the current lead, or do we need to rewrite it? Shinealittlelight (talk) 04:02, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Additionally, I have checked the rest of the first paragraph, and found that it fails verification as well. Here it is:

Christian nationalists have emphasized a recovery of territory in which Christianity formerly flourished, historically to establish a Pan-Christian state out of the countries within Christendom.

In support of this, we are given two sources:

1. This paper which points out that there was a tension between nationalism and the activities of the Crusaders in the holy land, and that the author finds it difficult to trace these feelings of the Crusaders about the Holy Land to the present day, but the author thinks they are likely are still present today in various groups. I don't see that this has anything to do with "Christian Nationalism" but rather has to do with attitudes of Christians toward the Holy Land.
2. An article on "Pan-Christianity" in the Encyclopedia of Nationalism from 1990 that (i) does not mention "Christian Nationalism" and (ii) consistently contrasts nationalism to "Pan-Christianity".

Far from failing verification, this sentence in the article seems to actually say the opposite of the sources that it cites! These errors continue into the first section of the article. Shinealittlelight (talk) 04:33, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

White Christian nationalism

See [1] discussing this new book.[https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-flag-and-the-cross-9780197618684?cc=a2&lang=en& The Flag and the Cross:White Christian Nationalism and the Threat to American Democracy Doug Weller talk 15:33, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

This is an astonishingly parochial view of christian nationalism

I don't want to start a flame war, but this article could only have been written by an American almost entirely ignorant of European history. Christian nationalism — in the sense that the nation and its political order derive their legitimacy from Christianity — has been the default setting of European politics since, at the latest, 800AD when Charlemagne was crowned Holy Roman Emperor by the Pope. The tradition is alive and well in Britain, where Charles III has just been crowned by the Archbishop of Canterbury in the course of a Communion service in Westminster Abbey. But this tradition survived the end of many monarchies. The main conservative (emphatically not fascist) parties of Italy and Germany after WW2 were both called "Christian Democrats". The Republic of Ireland had for most of the twentieth century an explicit commitment to Catholicism in its constitution.

It may be true that in an American context, Christian Nationalism has come to refer to a far-right ideology, although some version of this was entirely mainstream until the Sixties — look at the Pledge of Allegiance — but the world is a very great deal larger than the USA and the article ought at the very least be amended to show that its particular definition is of extremely limited use. Accabrown (talk) 12:44, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Without debating your central point, the Pledge of Allegiance is odd to invoke in that context, in that the Pledge was only made religious in mid-1954, giving you less than a six year window on America before the Sixties happened. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 12:58, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thank you for making a serious point politely. What I was trying, badly, to express, was that the pledge was not then seen as controversial. It was just a more emphatic restatement of what people vaguely supposed that everybody knew. Admittedly, this came up in the Cold War context where the enemy, to be resisted with military force, was "Godless Communism" — but this conflation of political and ideological rivalry is central to Christian nationalism.

The idea of America as a shining city on the hill is entirely derived from Christianity. (see Clifford Longley's "Chosen People" for a short history of this idea.). In any case, I think the entry should be rewritten to broaden the notion out and show that the current usage on the American Left is misleading in a wider context. Accabrown (talk) 08:19, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Bias

So obviously biased 167.98.135.4 (talk) 05:22, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Add Lebanon in the "By Country" Section

Can we start a section on Lebanon? I feel like Lebanon has a lot to go off of as far as Christian nationalism is concerned. I think important groups to mention would be the Kataeb Party, Lebanese Front, Lebanese Forces (Christian militia), Lebanese Forces (political party), and the Free Patriotic Movement. 140.141.4.65 (talk) 21:51, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Please do not add material that is not cited by reliable, secondary sources. See our guidelines on no original research and reliable sources (also, secondary sources). ButlerBlog (talk) 02:08, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

The Case for Christian Nationalism

An IP editor has repeatedly reinserted material regarding the book The Case for Christian Nationalism, which is not a book for an academic or academically-respected press. It is a book that defines and recommends a very specific, xenophobic version of Christian nationalism that cannot be assumed to be the general view of American Christian nationalists. The insertions have lacked third-party sources showing that the quotes being used of are import. It should not be reinserted. -- Nat Gertler (talk) Nat Gertler (talk) 06:24, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

"xenophobic version of Christian nationalism that cannot be assumed to be the general view of American Christian nationalists" So, you think that Christian nationalists are not xenophobic? Based on which source? Dimadick (talk) 08:05, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm not saying that American Christian nationalism is not generally or frequently xenophobic; I'm saying that because an advocacy book with Christian Nationalism in the title calls for xenophobic action, that does not make it a proper source for such statements. Cannot be assumed is meant differently than isn't. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 15:14, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Well, the situation has changed just in the last few days with the publication of Owen Strachan's "One “Holy Nation” in Christ: Christian Nationalism in Historical and Theological Perspective" in GDJT. He notes (p. 83) that Wolfe's book is "the longest text written in recent days to support CN". The most interesting quote is on p. 59: "In general, the New Testament is — by and large — missing from Wolfe's Thomistic project of political philosophy." StAnselm (talk) 18:33, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure that says much for inclusion here, but may fit nicely into the book's own article. Nat Gertler (talk) 19:33, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

It’s looks to be a fine source for the book and the wider phenomenon of Christian Nationalism in the context of this page. 3Kingdoms (talk) 16:20, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

I am uncertain of the reliability of the GDJT. It is a fairly new entry to the journal field, published by a ministry rather than by an academic press. However, I am unused to evaluating journals. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 18:08, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Armaly et. al.

This source appears to contradict itself. It says Christian nationalism is strongly related to support for specific and abstract political violence on its own. But it also says At low levels of white identity, perceived victimhood, and QAnon support, Christian nationalism was not a particularly infuential predictor of support for violence. These are just directly in contradiction with each other. Am I missing something? If CN is only a predictor of support for violence only in conjunction wtih these other views (e.g. QAnon support), as the second quote says, then it would seem CN isn't strongly related to support for violence on its own (i.e., in isolation from other views, such as QAnon support), as the first quote says. So both quotes can't be true. Shinealittlelight (talk) 17:29, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

I think there's a bit of nuance needed to understand the source. Firstly, the source makes it explicitly clear that CN itself is associated with political violence. As stated, Christian nationalism in the United States is associated with increased support for political violence like that seen at the U.S. Capitol in January 2021. The study goes into studying whether or not white identity, perceived victomhood, and support for QAnon influences the likelihood of violence by followers of CN, in which it finds support for violence appears to be most potent when combined with other individual characteristics. However, CN itself is still strongly related to support for specific and abstract political violence on its own, however, when compared at low levels of support with the previously mentioned influences, it was not a particularly influential predictor of support for violence. However, the source makes clear that the conditional nature of these effects should not be misunderstood to minimize the extent of the risks associated with Christian nationalism, as Christian nationalism, perceived victimhood, and white identity are all positively correlated, this toxic blend strikes us as an empirical reality rather than a hypothetical. Thus, CN itself is associated with violence, and these three influences increase the likelihood of violence. However, saying that without these three influences CN is not associated with violence is false, as the source makes it clear CN is still associated with violence on its own, its just that these cues inflame it. BootsED (talk) 01:44, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Do you affirm (with the source) that CN is both strongly related to support for political violence but also that CN is not a particularly influential predictor of support for violence? If so, can you please explain how something can be strongly related to support for violence but not a predictor of support for violence? Shinealittlelight (talk) 03:01, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

I think I explained myself in my prior reply. I'm not sure how I'm supposed to be more specific. I also disagree with the phrasing of your question. You are taking a quote out-of-context and removing half of it to prove a point that the article does not make. I also disagree that the source contradicts itself. If there was a contradiction the peer-reviewed study would not have been published. BootsED (talk) 23:09, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm not following your reply. You and the source appear to assert that (by itself) CN is strongly related to support for violence but is not a particularly influential predictor of support for violence. That at least appears to be contradictory. Some "peer reviewed" journals are very low quality. I can't say for sure that this one is in general, but it appears that they published an incoherent article in this instance. The way to show that this is not the case is to explain how "strongly related to support" for violence can differ from being "a particularly influential predictor" of such support. Sorry if you tried to expalin this and I missed it. It wasn't for lack of trying to understand what you wrote. I would add that we are currently entirely lacking the admission from the source that CN without these other factors is not correlated with increased support for violence. That's obviously an important admission in the source, and needs to be in our article. Shinealittlelight (talk) 00:34, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

POV Info

I deleted a recently-added paragraph that clearly violated WP:NPOV and WP:ATTACKPAGE and is not representative globally. For content as inflammatory as this, much stronger WP:RS sourcing (rather than one citation per claim) should be found before reconsidering its addition. --1990'sguy (talk) 02:29, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Agreed - adding a new book discussing South Africa isn't justifiable. You can't say that Christian nationalists are white supremacists from a global perspective. Christian nationalism is a form of religious nationalism, not ethnic nationalism. Would a Christian nationalist in Nigeria be a white supremacist? I suggest that if there is country-specific material, it be added to those sections. desmay (talk) 13:46, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes. The literature supports that white missionaries historically assumed themselves at the top of a hierarchy and acted accordingly. I can provide a dozen more citations. Skyerise (talk) 19:27, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

No. Read WP:BRD. Your edits haven't been accepted by two editors and the onus is on your to get consensus for the material you're adding. It's not appropriate for you to keep shoving material that does not have consensus in the article. The article is not about white missionaries is it? It's about a religious Christian nationalism. You need to explicitly discuss exactly what it is that you want to add here. desmay (talk) 20:05, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Feel free to criticize the sources then. WP:BRD is an essay and it is not binding. Skyerise (talk) 20:06, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

I feel as it was properly cited, the South African portion maybe not but it is true Christian nationalism may attract white supremacy, obviously not all believe in this but some do that also believe in Christian nationalism. Wiiformii (talk) 20:08, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

@Wiiformii:, if that's added it needs to be made clear. Obviously, white supremacy wouldn't have anything to do with Christian nationalism in Ghana, would it? desmay (talk) 20:12, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Christian nationalism doesn't only exist in the United States now does it? Plus the article you linked literally says "Christian nationalism is a growing force in Ghana" Wiiformii (talk) 20:14, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

That's correct. So if there is a country in which white supremacy and Christian nationalism are tied together, that needs to be made explicit. The black majority of Christian nationalists in Ghana are obviously not white supremacists. desmay (talk) 20:16, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Actually, that's a naive assumption. See this article: "the general rule is 'lighter is better'." Racists prefer lighter, even in Ghana. Skyerise (talk) 20:17, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Your link makes no mention of Christian nationalism. Conflating that with Christian nationalism is WP:OR and your novel synthesis, in violation of Wikipedia policy. desmay (talk) 20:22, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

On a talk page. If you throw alphabet soup at me all the time, it impedes discussion. Where was I suggesting adding anything to the article? Just pointing out that "obvious" assumptions are often untrue, and I don't think you know as much as you think you do if that's how you choose to respond to a talk page comment. Skyerise (talk) 20:25, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Fair enough, although I do not have many strong opinions, I feel as @Skyerise knows more, I just saw this edit on the recent edits page but in all honesty I do not know much, but I hope you guys find consensus. Wiiformii (talk) 20:17, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

@Skyerise:, do you understand that it makes no sense to broadly paint Christian nationalism as being associated with white supremacy when Christian nationalism exists in African countries? If you want to add that to country specific sections, then that's fine but you should provide the original quotes from the citations here so that they can be examined and discussed. desmay (talk) 20:20, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

As I pointed out above, even in black majority countries, 'lighter is better' is the prevailing attitude of racists, whether they be Christian or other. Skyerise (talk) 20:22, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Shadeism is not the same as white supremacy. Either way, your argument offers nothing in support of the assertion that Christian nationalists in Ghana are white supremacists. You can't make the claim that there is overlap of Christian nationalism with white supremacy when many Christian nationalists are non-white. At this time, please share direct quotations from the books you want to cite in the article so people in this discussion can see if they support your claims. desmay (talk) 20:31, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Peer-reviewed journal articles are not a strong enough source? Also, the material removed has nothing to do with Africa and Ghana. Saying, "because this doesn't relate to Africa and Ghana several peer-reviewed journal articles are not good enough and a whole section of the page must be removed" is ludicrous. BootsED (talk) 23:20, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Christian nationalism has manifestations globally, including countries like Ghana, Zambia, and Brazil. Do you think that white supremacy is a part of the Christian nationalist movements there? The ideology section is not just about the United States. White supremacy is not an integral part of Christian nationalism everywhere in the same way that displaying Christian symbols in the public square is. If you think that white supremacy is an issue of Christian nationalism in the US, add it in that section, but not in the general Ideology section. desmay (talk) 00:06, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

There's been some work done on the page and I and Desmay have moved a lot of the America-centric information to the United States section. I agree that better sources for Christian nationalism in a global sense are needed. BootsED (talk) 00:46, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Civil War and Cold War history

This edit was reverted - bringing the discussion here as to whether it merits inclusion. Superb Owl (talk) 22:06, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

For me, as constituted, I would agree with removal for now. The examples don't seem well contextualized and don't appear to have any particular importance to the concept of Christian Nationalism itself. As ever though, reasonable minds can certainly differ on the question. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 22:17, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Overall agree with removal currently. Or at least it is currently WP:UNDUE without additional writing in the edit. It's essential statement is:

"US constitution does not mention god + Confederate constitution does mention god (barely) = Christian nationalism issue

Each of those variables is problematic for a variety of reasons. Just10A (talk) 17:37, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

My issue is that this seems to be a case of reading history backwards. Christian Nationalism in the current sense of the term is a rather new (and in my opinion vague) term that can easily be misused. Given the complex nature/history of religion and government in the United States I do not think the term should be used here especially not in wikivoice.3Kingdoms (talk) 17:57, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good - will propose reinclusion only if more reliable sources can help to better explain the nature of the connection if any. One I just found referred to Christian Nationalism as 'echoes' of those initiatives. Superb Owl (talk) 18:02, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good. Best of luck with hunting for sources! 3Kingdoms (talk) 21:59, 4 September 2024 (UTC)