The Case for Christian Nationalism

7. The Christian Prince | I. Introduction and II. The Prince

Previously:

The Case for Christian Nationalism

The national will alone cannot terminate immediately into national action. It must terminate upon a mediator - upon one who translates that national general will into specific commands of action that lead the nation to its good.¹

This description of the mediator is worth spending extra time parsing; the national will does not pass through, or interact with, mediation, it “terminates upon a mediator”. This is the type of statement in political theory that most readers gloss over, because, in its vagueness, it sounds fairly agreeable; but this is also a turn of phrase where the mind of the author peeks through. Every nation has a highest authority where decisions are final, but we would not describe our executive, legal, or judicial systems as a terminating authority; that is not the telos of the nation. Modern Western law is characterized by the checks and balances of multiple arbitrating authorities, something that Wolfe deems nontraditional². Though it does not necessarily feel this way as of late, theoretically, should the President of the United States make an unfavorable decision against an individual citizen, that person would still have multiple levels of legal recourse. That is not the type of system that the phrase “terminate upon a mediator” invokes; it is very final and speaks more to the image of a general than a legislator. This is bolstered by Wolfe’s stated vision of “theocratic Caesarism”³; the Roman senate very quickly became a hamstrung, lesser entity under the Caesars, so it is quite telling that he chose this reference instead of one that would more convey that the will of the people would actually be respected by the monarch (the Magna Carta, for example). He has previously stated that “all civil rule is by consent of the ruled”, but will later say that he would “disregard the non-Christian withholding of consent”⁴, so there is definitely mixed messaging in his theory.

I cannot conceive of a true renewal of Christian commonwealths without great men leading their people to it.⁵

Conspicuously absent from all of this writing about what it would take for renewal of Christian commonwealths is even a passing mention of how such an act would be wholly dependent on the will of the Father. This is especially inexcusable for Wolfe, as a Presbyterian, because there is no other Protestant denomination more concerned with the sovereign will of God. He simply assumes it to be God’s will that, after two and a half centuries of American liberal democracy, we should take extreme, potentially violent action to enact “theocratic Caesarism”, a “totality of national action” where a single individual is the ultimate decider of national good. Would not a rational Christian seek confirmation of this vision in God’s inerrant word more than his own interpretation of natural law? Would he not seek to convince other Christians with words from the only inerrant authority on the matter?

“Prince” is a fitting title for a man of dignity and greatness of soul who will lead a people to liberty, virtue, and godliness - to greatness.⁶

The Spanish had a word for such a man: el Caudillo. There is no direct translation that gives its full weight, though leader, chief, or warlord will often be given. The Caudillo is more than just a military or political leader, he carries the very soul of the nation; he is a living, breathing rallying cry. The name evoked images of great conquerors, such as El Cid, Cortés, and Pizzaro. Even before Francisco Franco, the dictator of Spain from 1939 to 1975, had risen to power he was being called “un caudillo” (a as opposed to the) by the nationalist press.⁷ As the youngest general in the nation’s history, he was a rising star that was considered a required asset for the legitimacy of an insurrection against the second Spanish Republic. Once the civil war began, and several potential rivals for power died, including both the presumed military dictator and the leader of the Falange Española, he quickly finagled his way to the position of Jefe del Estado Español (Head of the Spanish State)⁸, although there was no real nationalist state yet to speak of. Though he would refer to himself by this title, the official propaganda campaign that followed referred to him as el Caudillo, in an effort to place him ideologically and internationally on par with the Führer and Duce (both of whom provided significant military assistance to his campaign). All newspapers in the nationalist zone had to place under their masthead, “One nation, one state, one Caudillo”.⁹ As a children’s textbook later read, “a Caudillo is a gift that God makes to the nations that deserve it and the nation accepts him as an envoy who has arisen through God’s plan to ensure the nation’s salvation.”¹⁰ This is what comes to mind when I read these types of statements from Wolfe, describing “a man of dignity and greatness of soul who will lead a people”, most notably the statement with which he will end this chapter:

… we should pray that God would raise up such a leader from among us: one who would suppress the enemies of God and elevate his people; recover a worshiping people; restore masculine prominence in the land and a spirit for dominion… In a word, pray that God would bring about, through a Christian prince, a great renewal.¹¹

Next:

The Case for Christian Nationalism

1. Stephen Wolfe, The Case for Christian Nationalism (Moscow, Idaho: Canon Press, 2022), 277.

2. Ibid., 278.

3. Ibid., 279.

4. Ibid., 72, 346.

5. Ibid., 278-279.

6. Ibid., 279.

7. Paul Preston, Franco: A Biography (New York, NY: BasicBooks, a division of HarperCollins, 1994), 42.

8. Ibid., 184.

9. Ibid., 187.

10. Ibid., xvii.

11. Stephen Wolfe, 323.