The Case for Christian Nationalism
The Case for Christian Nationalism
1. Nations Before the Fall | I. A Rational Animal
Previously:
Wolfe begins the first chapter of his book with a quote about “tribal behavior” from Samuel Francis1, who was fired from his position at The Washington Times in 1995, after conservative journalist Dinesh D’Souza wrote an article for The Washington Post quoting him as blaming “humanism and universalism for facilitating ‘the war against the white race’” and that country music star Garth Brooks was “‘repulsive’ because ‘he has that stupid universalist song, in which we all intermarry.’”2 Writings by Francis are popular among white nationalists, including the former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, David Duke, who says Francis showed “how Jewish supremacists invented the word [racist] used to describe negatively those of us who love our heritage and want to preserve it.”3 Wolfe gets his idea of “anarcho-tyranny”, that of a state purposefully demoralizing its citizens by condoning anarchy, from Francis4; in chapter 3, I will highlight an article Wolfe wrote on the subject, which is centered around a longstanding white nationalist trope.
Following this quote, the section begins with the question, “What can we say of man’s animality?”5 This leads Wolfe to the correct, general revelation conclusion that man is a social creature, but his pattern of seeking to first define man’s rough telos from nature and then refine it with special revelation will present problems when he attempts to map post-fall social behaviors to pre-fall man. Simply put, if this were the apparent order of operations to understand man’s purpose then secular philosophy would not be in such complete disagreement with theology.
When we say that by nature man is social, are we assuming a state of integrity, a state of sin, a state of pre-glory redemption or a state of glorification?… Surprisingly, no Christian writer (of which I’m aware) has sought to provide a systematic treatment of human sociality that shows continuity and discontinuity between these states.6
The epistles provide us with plenty of understanding of the dichotomous character of human relations between the states of sin and “pre-glory redemption”. As Paul wrote to Titus:
Remind them to be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work, to speak evil of no one, to avoid quarreling, to be gentle, and to show perfect courtesy toward all people. For we ourselves were once foolish, disobedient, led astray, slaves to various passions and pleasures, passing our days in malice and envy, hated by others and hating one another. But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by his grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life. (Titus 3:1-7)
How can we hypothesize the functions of a government of and for prelapsarian man, by modeling the interactions of people who are mostly still in a state of slavery to sin, and who hate each other? That starting point might yield decent, secular political theory, but we cannot shoehorn it into the mold of a “Christian” political theory which seeks the optimal state of redeemed man.
In the next sections, Wolfe will use a selection of 16th and 17th century Reformed theologians to give his theories theological weight. While this is certainly better than using secular sources or personal observations, relying on appeals to tradition from a biased selection of Reformed thought that fits preconceptions, instead of direct exegetical insight, ultimately serves to further weaken his position. Out of this selection, the terribly wrong assumption that certain aspects of fallen man’s interrelations are remnants of prelapsarian society - including the potential for violent action and the need to protect against it - will also be presented as the basis of his theory.
A note on Wolfe’s theory of life without a fall
Claiming knowledge of how earthly society would be structured, should man never have fallen, producing a sinless humanity to populate the earth, is a position of such immense hubris that I must remain conscious to not become overly didactic or dismissive in my dissent.7 Here, on this side of the fall, we have no conceivable notion of what it means to exist in the direct presence of the Creator. We know that when we once again are able to stand in his presence, and not instantly die (Exodus 33:20), our condition will be so different that we will, in some way, be “like angels in heaven” (Mark 12:24-25). Can anyone living (other than Christ himself) claim to know what it truly means to have had, or to regain, access to the river and tree of life (Revelation 22:1-5)?
This subject must be treated with awe and humility. Sadly, Wolfe will not do that, and he will display a lack of understanding of fallen man’s radical corruption that, when combined with his foundation of natural principles, will become something akin to Semi-Pelagianism.
Next:
Stephen Wolfe, The Case for Christian Nationalism (Moscow, Idaho: Canon Press, 2022), 39.
Dinesh D’Souza, “Racism: It’s a White (and Black) Thing,” Washington Post, September 24, 1995, https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/1995/09/24/racism-its-a-white-and-black-thing/46284ab5-417c-4c0c-83e1-029d51655d91/.
By Sam Francis — Why ‘Racist’ Is Not What We Are!,” David Duke.Com (blog), February 17, 2005, https://davidduke.com/why-racist-is-not-what-we-are/.
Stephen Wolfe, 40.
Ibid., 41.
This position from Wolfe alone is enough for me to be shocked that Canon Press published this theory, as is. Though I, like many people, often take umbrage with Douglas Wilson’s positions on practical application of Scripture, his doctrinal positions are very orthodox. I am far from the only person to notice the poor doctrine that serves as the basis of this theory. As Kevin DeYoung wrote in his review, Wolfe’s theory is “built upon a weak and speculative foundation about how people would have formed distinct nations even without the fall, it gives too much credence to our own fallen inclinations, and it gives too little consideration for how our desire for ‘similarity’ has been tainted by sin.” Neil Shenvi writes, “… it is pure speculation that humanity would have formed distinct nations even if the Fall had never happened… It seems at least as plausible to argue that Adam himself, as the human race’s covenant head, would have served as a normative cultural, linguistic, and familial anchor for all humanity across the globe. In this case, we might just as well argue that globalism is natural and good, a conclusion which Wolfe surely wants to avoid.”