One thing I've noticed about public hand wringing over the threat of Christian nationalism and danger of blending God's agenda with political idolatry is that it's a one-way street.
When Trump holds up a Bible it's alarming, but when Chuck Schumer equates the appointment of Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court with the tomb of Jesus being empty, we hear nothing.
When a minister prays at a MAGA rally for God to deliver the White House back into the hands of the previous administration, we're on the cusp of a return to crusading Christians evangelizing with the sword. But when a minister uses his pulpit to campaign for open borders and abortion on demand, that draws no David French columns.
Perhaps there's a racial component to the inconsistency. After all, historically "black churches" are where you find the most frequent and most egregious cases of pulpit politicking. It cracked me up months ago to see the responses when a minister named Stephen Feinstein pointed out the obvious:
The "public intellectual" Tisby went ballistic, accusing Feinstein of being too ignorant to understand that "black Christian nationalism" is more inclusive and leads to an "expansion of the democratic processes," and therefore it's okay. I wrote about all of it a year ago.
But suppose we set race to the side and just stuck with white preachers. Why are we to fear a white preacher who says it is God's preference we elect Republicans so that we can end abortion, but we are not to fear a white preacher who says it is God's preference we elect Democrats so we can expand abortion? Why is one raising the specter of "Christian nationalism" and the other is not?
And if you doubt that the latter is happening, allow me to introduce you to a Michigan preacher who absurdly expects others to consider him "Reverend." There is nothing reverend about this man or his Easter message (yes, Easter). In fact, if blasphemy has a definition, this is it in sermon form:
If you watch the full message, Chris Roe of Fountain Street Church in Grand Rapids actually draws a parallel between the crucifixion of Jesus and the expulsion of two Tennessee legislators. He calls it "just another Good Friday story of our time." That's a title he also extends to the Supreme Court's repeal of Roe v Wade.
That's what leads to his morally appalling and soul imperiling assessment that Governor Whitmer's work to generate more abortions in the state of Michigan, "is the good news of Easter."
It's hard for me to get past the trembling fear I feel for this prideful man knowing that there is a reason Scripture warns those who preach and teach that they will be held to a higher account. It's hard for me to do anything but pray for his penitence and repentance before a God who will not be mocked.
Yet I still can't help but note the odd dichotomy that persists within America's political commentariat. When Greg Locke goes on an unhinged rant where he concludes that Democrats in America are all demons, it generates "Christian nationalism" warnings from MSNBC, Newsweek, the BBC, and a multitude of others.
But when Chris Roe uses Resurrection Sunday to blasphemously promote a public policy of legalized child sacrifice as "the good news of Easter," here's what we get:
So we are to believe that when the name of Jesus is invoked in a way that offends progressive politics, it's a frightening amalgamation of church and state. But attach it to the progressive agenda in a breathtakingly blasphemous way and all is well? Sorry, I'm not buying it, and neither should you.
The wiser course of action is to heed the wisdom of former President Lincoln, who had no time for talk about whose "side" God was on, but rather urged his countrymen to take inventory of their own hearts and ensure they were on His.
