The Case for Christian Nationalism
The Case for Christian Nationalism
8. The Right to Revolution | II. Statement of the Question
Previously:
A Christian people share particular norms, customs, blood, etc., which are not easily forced upon them.1
Wolfe has spent much of his book, especially in chapter 5, attempting to make the case that a “Christian people” can be made up of many who have had “Christian culture” forced on them. On top of this, he made the case that it is good for society to have churches full of people pretending to believe, rather than openly disbelieving. This sentence does not logically comport with that main theme of his book. Secondly, it must be noted that he has injected “blood” into what makes up a “Christian people”. This should be outright rejected by members of the universal church.
Nor is the question whether a group of Christians, dwelling in a non-Christian nation under non-tyrannical conditions, may revolt… non-Christian rulers still have true civil power, and resisting them is resisting God… The question is whether a Christian people, being under tyrannical conditions, may conduct revolution to establish a Christian commonwealth…2
As previously mentioned, the belief that Christians can revolt against tyrannical rulers is out of step with Calvin and other reformers, and does not meet the bounds of his appeals to “Reformed tradition”. Again, considering that Wolfe uses Calvin as his most cited exegetical source, he must provide his own exegesis to counter this assertion. He will attempt to somewhat do so with Romans 13 in the sixth section of this chapter, so I will save my full rebuttal for then. Something Wolfe also fails to mention is that conducting this type of war against a subjectively “tyrannical” government requires looking at everyone in your nation who does not agree with you as a potential mortal enemy.
Next:
Stephen Wolfe, The Case for Christian Nationalism (Moscow, Idaho: Canon Press, 2022), 328.
Ibid., 328.