We tend to think Evangelicals helped create Christian Nationalism, but did Mainline Protestantism have a role? I sat down with Beau Underwood, co-author of "Baptizing America: How Mainline Protestants Helped to Build Christian Nationalism," to explore the historical roots and contemporary impact of Christian nationalism in America. Beau talks about how mainline Protestants have laid the groundwork for modern expressions of Christian nationalism, highlighting pivotal moments like President Truman's endorsement of the revised standard version of the Bible in 1952 and President Eisenhower's active role in religious affairs. Beau wants to shed light on the responsibility of Mainline Protestant churches in addressing their historical complicity and suggests practical steps for repentance and change within their communities.
Show Notes:
Baptizing America book (the promo code is BAPODCAST)
Word and Way Magazine (includes several articles related to the book)
Episode 181 with Ted Peters (another view on Christian Nationalism)
Episode 76 with Brian Kaylor (on Religious Freedom in Russia)
Donate: Venmo- @churchandmainpod |TipTopJar- https://tiptopjar.com/electricparson
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/churchandmain
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/churchandmainpod/
Threads: https://www.threads.net/@churchandmainpod
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@churchmainpodcast
Website: https://churchandmain.org/
[0:34] Hello, and welcome to Church in Maine, a podcast for people interested at the intersection of faith in our modern world. I'm Dennis Sanders, your host. If you're someone that looks at the world with the day's news in one hand and the Bible in another, this podcast is for you. If you want to learn more about the podcast, listen to past episodes, or donate, check us out at churchinmaine.org. You can also visit churchandmaine.substack.com to read related articles. Subscribe to the podcast on your favorite podcast app, and please consider relieving a review. That helps others find this podcast. So if you remember a few weeks ago, I had on Lutheran theologian Ted Peters to talk about Christian nationalism.
[1:23] Now, Ted Peters has a belief that Christian nationalism is a problem, but he also tends to think that the way that it is talked about in the media tends to be overblown. Now, you can listen to that episode by clicking on the link that's found in the show notes. As I said back then, I wanted to do a series of episodes on this topic because
[1:48] it's such an important issue in this election year. And I've been hoping to have other voices on this issue, and today's guest continues the series, and he is arguing from the other side. Today I'm going to be talking to Bo Underwood. Bo is an ordained minister in the Christian Church, Disciples of Christ, and along with previous guest Brian Kaler.
[2:16] The two have written a book called Baptizing America, How Mainline Protestants Helped Build Christian Nationalism. Now, as that provocative title suggests, Bo and Brian contend that mainline Protestants have had a role in creating the Christian nationalism that we see in our news today. They see it in the American flags that are displayed in our many sanctuaries, to the Pledge of Allegiance that we say, where we include the words that we are a nation, quote-unquote, under God, and also to what has been called civil religion.
[2:56] Now, in this episode, Beau and I will talk about how church and state mix, where and how mainline Protestantism had a role in creating Christian nationalism, and if there is a difference between patriotism and nationalism. A little bit about Bo. He is currently the senior pastor of Allisonville Christian Church in Indianapolis. Besides baptizing America, he is also the author of Dear Son, Raising Faithful, Just, and Compassionate Men. And he is also a contributing editor to Word and Way magazine.
[3:34] So let's listen to this important conversation with Bo Underwood.
[3:39] Music.
[4:15] Bobo, thanks for joining me on the podcast, and I'm looking forward to this discussion. Thanks, Dennis. It's great to be here. So why don't we go ahead and start with the most basic question here is, what is your book about? Absolutely. So to tell that origin story, I think, is really important. Brian, my co-author, and I were noticing that as this conversation about Christian nationalism was gaining increased prominence in our public life, a lot of what evangelicals and fundamentalists and more conservative Christians were being blamed for were really things that you could trace back to earlier periods in American Christianity, particularly what mainline Protestants had done. And this wasn't being named. And so we, as people who, myself being from the mainline Protestant tradition, and Brian, somebody who's sympathetic to it.
[5:13] You know, we decided to write an essay naming this reality. And we published that in January of 2023 in a publication called Religion and Politics. And we got such a good response from scholars and mainline faith leaders and others that we We decided to turn that into a book. So we have written a book called Baptizing America, How Mainline Protestants Helped to Build Christian Nationalism. That is now out from Chalice Press. And it just traces the historical role that mainline Protestants have had in sort of creating this fertile soil in which contemporary expressions of Christian nationalism have grown. And it does offer some ways that mainline pastors and others too, but particularly mainliners, can have this conversation in their communities and their churches and what they might do about it.
[6:03] So what were, and how would you kind of explain some of the reasonings or the things that mainline denominations, what role do they have in kind of creating this? I know in some of the things that I've read related to your book and also some of the podcasts that you've been on, that there were some things, especially in our recent history, probably in the last 70 years or so, that you think have laid the groundwork for what we're seeing today.
[6:33] Yeah, I mean, there was certainly a time in, you know, 20th century America where mainline Protestants were really sort of the dominant religious group in terms of cultural power and influence. And we saw that power being used in ways that were seen as what was good for the mainline church was good for the country and vice versa. And so you saw this mixing of American and Christian identities in ways that today we would find a little bit shocking, whether that was sort of bringing church into the state, or whether it was certain consecrations or certain policies, or whether it was bringing the state into the church in terms of certain rituals and other observances. The big one that everybody fights about, we can talk about, are flags of the sanctuary, right? That flag that got in your sanctuary got there for a reason, and that reason has evolved over time, and it's created a lot of angst and conflict in churches. So one of the things we talk about in the book is what that history is and how you can begin to have a conversation around it today, because what that flag means today is probably a lot different than when it first came in the sanctuary.
[7:43] And you've talked about especially the role of both two presidents, Eisenhower and Truman, in this. What were those roles that they have? Because one of the things that makes it interesting is that at least it makes it sound like this was a bipartisan affair, if you look at it from a party standpoint, as opposed to just one party, where we would think about that today. Yeah, you know, we do highlight several historical episodes, and Eisenhower and Truman both feature prominently. So let me just name a couple of them, right? Right. So when the when the God box, the interdenominational center in New York City was built, Dwight Eisenhower was invited to come commemorate that moment. Right. So here was a religious building being built by religious organizations and they wanted the president United States to come, you know, be a part of that blessing of that moment. And then when the.
[8:46] National Council of Churches produced the Revised Standard Version of the Bible in 1952. They brought the very first copy, the copy that came off the printing press, to the White House to present it to President Truman. And he then gives a speech in the Rose Garden where he celebrates the launching of this Bible. And he ties it to his foreign policy goals and says, you know, if only this Bible could be read on the other side of the Iron Curtain, we would achieve peace in the world or something like that. And making very clear this connection between what the Bible claims and says and communicates and what he was trying to accomplish for American foreign policy.
[9:23] I think in both those instances, right, I used to say this hypothetically, right? I used to say if President Trump had done this today, a lot of mainliners would be up in arms about that. And then, of course, a few months ago, former President Trump was indeed hawking a Bible. And my co-author and I wrote a piece for Religion Unplugged pointing out that this had been done before. It wasn't quite as obscene in terms of trying to sell it, but when Harry Truman blessed it in the Rose Garden, he was the actual president, not a former president at the time. And in both those cases, you had these religious groups seeking out essentially validation for their Bible project by this powerful political figure. And if we start to think about it, it doesn't make much sense, right? Why would anybody producing a Bible want any political or secular authority to say, this is important, this is meaningful, you should buy this, you should use this? It's this weird seeking of secular authority blessing the church's efforts. And I don't think it made sense in 1952, just as I don't think it made sense when Donald Trump did it a few months ago. But a lot of people called Trump to account for good reason, but didn't know that story about Truman at all.
[10:37] Why don't people know about that story? And probably also to add, don't know about the story about Eisenhower either. Yeah, I think this is the heart of the question, Dennis. I mean, it's why we wrote the book, right? We want people to know these stories and understand this. I mean, I think in general, we're, you know, it's hard. We're always ignorant of history in the sense of history is so expansive, and none of us in our lifetimes with our limited understandings can fully grasp it all. So I'm sure that there's some of that going on. It's just a tension span. And some of it is, you know, we assume a lot of things about the past that weren't true, or we, in some sense, presume that when we see somebody else doing something, somebody else who we may not like, may not agree with doing something we don't like, don't agree with, we assume the worst about them and the best about us. So I think that there's some tribalism that goes on there. I think there's some history of ignorant of history that goes on there. I think there's a lot of people who just live in the present moment. And they're not aware of the broader context. And we're hoping that this book helps people become a little more aware of the broader context.
[11:43] So part of also what this kind of brings up in some of the things that you've talked about and I've read, could be considered to what some people would say is civic religion, which is, as you know, has a long history in American society. And I'm kind of neither saying good or bad, but it's just that it's there. Is there any relationship to Christian nationalism, or is civic religion basically Christian nationalism in your views of this?
[12:23] Yeah, so I think that the chapter of the book that will get us in the most trouble, or at least cause the biggest stir, is probably the chapter we wrote on civil religion. Because we essentially say that this concept is no longer useful, that this concept is hard to define, that even if you go back and look at some of the original writings around it, it's not obvious what is civil religion and what isn't. And that it becomes a gateway to Christian nationalism pretty easily. So when we hear the word civil religion, I think what we're trying to talk about is this idea that there's these public rituals and public ideals that have some kind of transcendent meaning for a country. There's something that matters to all of us in a way that's more than just material, transactional. It's something that is sort of imbued collectively with meaning that we all adhere to and we all share and it often has a religious verve without being it's you know sort of having a lot of religious concreteness or particularity so we think about like a memorial day ceremony or we think about a you know inauguration of a president where the day seems to be elevated in significance and even has sort of a spiritual emphasis without ever becoming concrete as being you know sectarian um.
[13:45] The problem is where are those lines between the religious and the secular, between what is sort of vaguely civil religion and very quite clearly coercive and Christian nationalism? I don't think those lines are easy to demarcate. I think that the more we see our society becoming pluralistic, the harder it is to presume that these moments aren't coercive in some way or exclusive in some way. And I also think that a lot of what we used to go by as a civil religion was more Christian nationalistic than people wanted to realize. And again, I'm not saying it was ever okay, but it was more tolerable, perhaps, in a society that was more homogenous. But as we become more diverse, the consequences of it are much more obvious to see in terms of the way they exclude.
[14:35] I mean, I think that that also brings up then this question as we are becoming a more pluralistic society with people from various parts of the world with different cultures, various and different religions or no religion. It's the question of what is the role of faith in our modern society? Is the solution then something closer to kind of the French la cité, where religion is kind of either neutral or just not present, or is it something different? How do we handle all of that in looking at the role of religion in our society? Yeah, I think this is the question, right? And one of the big questions in this conversation, because a lot of people hear Christian nationalism, and we can talk in a minute perhaps about specifically what that is, but they hear that as code for Christians shouldn't be in the public square, or Christians shouldn't have a voice, or somehow we're trying to diminish Christianity in our society. And I don't think that that's true at all. I think what we're saying is it's time for Christians to be very aware of how they engage the public square. So, yeah.
[16:00] And it's one thing for me to say, I am a Christian, and because I am a Christian, I have these convictions, and these convictions lead me to support these public policies, which lots of other people with different convictions support for different reasons. And there's perhaps what the political theorists refer to as a public reason I support this. So for instance, on immigration, I might support immigration reform that focuses on keeping families together because of my belief in Jesus calling us to welcome the stranger. I might also support it because I think the moral fabric of our society is stronger when we keep families together, right? So the first is a theological reason, the second is a public reason, and as long as I can sort of justify it on the grounds of public reason, I'm okay. Now, if I come into the public square and say, I know what God wants, God wants this, and I expect you to do what God wants, and the government to force people to do what God wants, we have a name for that. That's a theocracy, right? That's where we're pushing a particular religious understanding on everybody, and we're rooting our public policy not in democratic reason, not in popular will, but in some understanding of the divine's expectations.
[17:14] So the goal here is to really think about how do Christians understand their engagement in the public sphere, and what are Christians wanting their government to do? A lot of Christian nationalists, and you've looked at some of the rhetoric, they don't care whether or not something has majority support. They don't care whether something respects people's civil rights. They want their particular beliefs and social order enforced, no matter what, because they think it's the way society should be. And that's troubling, right? There's social science data showing that the stronger you are a proponent of Christian nationalistic ideas, the less supportive you are of civil rights.
[17:56] Again, there's a name for that, but it's not democracy. It's authoritarianism, it's theocracy, it's something else than the democratic project that we've embarked on here in the United States. So one of the other things that i have been interesting to hear and wonder about is when we talk about christian nationalism we immediately think that it is something that is a conservative or at least you know if we're thinking about it ideologically a conservative phenomenon, obviously its roots are much more as you're saying probably more complicated than that that.
[18:31] But is, let's say, someone that you meet on the street that is a social conservative, is that the same as Christian nationalism or not? And if it's not, what are the differences? Yeah. So let me give the academic definition of Christian nationalism, and then I'll get a more sort of perhaps understandable definition, right? So the sort of the classic definition or a common definition is Whitehead and Perry's from Taking America Back for God, where they say that Christian nationalism is, quote, an ideology that idealizes and advocates a fusion of American civic life with a particular type of Christian identity and culture, right? So when we talk about Christian nationalism, we're talking about this conflating, this fusing of Christian identity and American identity. To be a good American is to be a good Christian. To be a good Christian is to be a good American. And of course, within that, there's particular understandings of what Christianity is. It tends to be, you know, sort of traditionalist, patriarchal Christianity, and what means to be a good American, right? And certain connotations around that, especially with regards to race, sexual orientation, things like that. And so when you put those things together and essentially use the power of one to enforce the power of the other, that's when you're into Christian nationalism.
[19:55] You can be a social conservative, and you can advocate for particular public policies, right? But it's when you're saying you're only a good American if you believe this, right? Or you're only a good Christian if you believe this, and that's what should rule in the public square that you come over into Christian nationalism. And I do think that But there's a lot of people who use this label of Christian nationalism wrongly to sort of reinforce anything I don't like. And we need to be very clear about what it is, right? It's trying to fuse American identity and Christian identity in a way that is mutually reinforcing and essentially violates democratic norms as a result.
[20:35] Where do you see, and you know, if we are talking about the roots of this coming from more mainline sources, What then, should someone who is in a mainline denomination and, let's say, reads your book, has this discussion, what's next? What should they be doing? Yeah, so I am fond of saying that as a mainline Protestant pastor, my voice doesn't carry a lot of influence with sort of Trumpian evangelicals, right? Given the things that I'm on the record as believing, given the sort of identity of my church, they're not going to give me a lot of credit, and they're not going to give me a lot of influence over what they do. So I can scream at them all day. I can get on social media and be angry all day, and that may be cathartic for me, but it's not going to actually change anything. thing. And instead, what I need to be doing is thinking about how I can get at this problem, how I can help make this better within my sphere of influence.
[21:48] And so I think we need to think about the idea that if mainline Protestant churches have historically been a part of the problem, if they've helped create this monster and are still in some sense feeding the monster, then the first thing we can do, the most effective thing we can do to address this issue is by interrogating our own practices, looking for our own complicity, and then engaging in practices of repentance. So let's go back to the flag for a minute, right? A lot of American flags were brought into sanctuaries in mainland Protestant churches during the Cold War, or even maybe a little bit before that in World War II. And it was about saying, you know, we are good Christians, we are against atheistic communism, and we're going to show that by bringing the flag and tying the flag to our religious practice.
[22:38] Theologically, that doesn't make a lot of sense, right? If our sanctuaries are embassies of heaven, why are we flying the flag of any one nation in there? You wouldn't go to Washington, D.C. and walk onto the Australian embassy's campus and expect to see the American flag flown there. You're at the Australian embassy. So, inside this embassy of heaven, there should not be a flag from the United States, from Brazil, from Sweden, from South Africa, from any country, because it doesn't belong to any country. It belongs to heaven. It belongs to God. And the flag is really theologically improper for the flag to be there.
[23:16] But we need to talk about why it was brought in, that for a certain generation to take that flag out says something that they're not being a good Christian, they're not being a good American. You need to have that conversation with them, help them to maybe reinterpret some things, help you to understand where they're coming from and their story and why it matters to them to begin with, and really interrogate what it meant decades ago and what it means today. day. Too many pastors go in and just say, that flag has to get out of the sanctuary, and I'm going to rip it out, and this is the hill I'm going to die on, and they'll end up getting fired over it or running out half the church over it. And it's not constructive, right? There is a more constructive way to do this.
[23:52] But that allows us to see that we've really perpetuated this problem in so many different ways. So one thing we recommend doing in the book is first educating your congregation on what Christian nationalism is, using some of these resources to have this discussion to help people understand the phenomenon and the ideology, and then look at how you're advancing it, and perhaps undo those things that you are doing so that you aren't perpetuating it. And in that sense, what I think happens is we create Christian communities that stand in contrast to those churches where the flag is everywhere and fireworks are going off in the sanctuary and it's God bless the USA every Sunday. And in some sense, we can help people see that there's a different way of being Christian that I think is more attractive, right? I think Jesus is really compelling. I think following Jesus is the best way to spend one's life.
[24:46] And I think the more we can keep the focus there, people will like discovering that, and they'll find that attractive, and they'll want to be a part of communities like that. So in some sense, I really do believe that churches that sort of interrogate their own Christian nationalism and diminish it or get rid of it are going to end up being more attractive Christian communities. And so I think there's some self-interest here, if we really want to get to that level of cynicism about it.
[25:14] One of the, kind of, in bringing this up about the flag and some other things, is the question of patriotism. Where does one end and where does one begin? So, you know, is it okay for Christians to to be patriotic, if they understand the right ordering of things, And when does that blend into kind of Christian nationalism? So I guess if you're trying to get what I'm saying here is, is it okay to have a love of country as long as it doesn't become idolatrous? Or is it both are both a problem? Yeah, no, I think you hit the nail on the head there. I mean, I'm very patriotic, right? Like, I really believe in the ideals of the United States and love what we stand for and want us to live unto them. I love fireworks, right? I enjoy a good firework celebration on July 4th. What I don't want to do is have fireworks lit off in my sanctuary. One, I don't want to burn the church down, and two, that's not the right place for this.
[26:18] To be patriotic is to have sort of an appropriate love or pride in one's nation. To be a Christian nationalist is to elevate one's nation to the status of an idol where the nation is beyond critique. where the nation is given a sense of perfectness that only belongs to God. And when the nation beyond is critiqued, what we can't do then is say we're not living up to our ideals, or that was wrong, and we can't hold our leaders accountable because we've elevated them to this godly status that is just inappropriate. I mean, a nation is simply a humanly constructed entity of how we're going to live together. And what we believe as Christians is that humans are fallible. And so anything we create is fallible. So we should be calling our country to live, again, more into our ideals. We can be patriotic and be proud of what we've accomplished as a country. What we shouldn't be doing is saying this country is godlike, that this country is a divine entity that in some sense has a special mission in the world that is beyond critique and beyond examination because it's been blessed by God. I just think that that's almost the definition of idolatry right there. So would something like the Civil Rights Movement be an example of that type of what you're explaining here?
[27:45] Yeah, I think the Civil Rights Movement is really an interesting example of what we're trying to talk about today versus back then. I mean, I think there again, you had... A diverse group of religious leaders, certainly Christians, but also Jewish leaders and other leaders and non-religious leaders sort of calling the nation to live up to certain ideals that said some religious undertones, but were still about civil rights, were still about democratic equality. And they were drawing on the resources of their tradition, but they were doing so in a way that was really about making democracy fuller and helping democracy – helping the country become more democratic. In some sense, what we're calling for here in our book, but also more broadly those speaking out against Christian nationalism, is for Christians to come to democracy's defense.
[28:38] And I think that's pretty easy to do. As a Christian, I think that God wants all of us to flourish, and I think democracy is the governmental way where the most people can flourish in a society. And so when I stand in support of democracy, I'm thinking, well, democracy allows me as a pastor and my church community to do our work, to do our mission, to serve God's mission in the world, to offer our witness, to engage in practices of worship without interference by the state. And i see that it allows the most people to flourish so i can absolutely as a christian come to democracy's defense i think the civil rights movement was trying to call the country to a more democratic way of being that what the civil rights movement wasn't doing was saying there's only one way to be an american it's to be this kind of christian and everybody has to become that because that's what america is it's quite common if we you know i actually just got I received an email newsletter recently of someone, a pastor colleague of mine, that prayed at the opening of the state capitol on a certain day. That's quite common throughout the United States. Even in Washington, there are chaplains for both the House and the Senate. During inaugurations, there's usually someone that prays.
[30:01] Are there things that we should question doing moving forward? Are there other ways that, you know, other things that we should be thinking about and how that might perpetuate Christian nationalism? Yeah, so I think that this is one of those really kind of gray areas where Brian especially, we do it in the book, but Brian especially has gone out there and been very critical of legislative chaplains and legislative prayers. And I think the criticism is that they are by definition exclusionary, right? That even somebody who's praying in the broadest way possible, the most generic way possible, is going to exclude somebody because there's going to be somebody who doesn't feel like that prayer fits their own belief system. And so you have the government sponsoring a prayer that is automatically leaving somebody out and making somebody else feel like they are not a full participant in the work of governing, whether that's a legislator, a voter, etc.
[31:06] I also think that there are certain some practices that are worse than others, right? So in some places, there is one person who does all the praying. In other places, there's, you know, diverse groups of chaplains that are brought in, and there might be a Muslim chaplain, a humanist chaplain, there's a wide witness. And then it becomes closer to that civil religion idea we were talking about, where it's, again, hard to exactly define, but we can see that there's some effort here to sort of be representative of the pluralistic nature of our society. In that practice, and that is far less Christian nationalistic by definition, right? If you've got a Jewish rabbi praying a prayer, you're pretty far from Christian nationalism at that point.
[31:44] So I think it really matters in how it's done, but again, I think we should think about what's going on there, right? Even if we are able to offer a prayer that's so generic that it passes constitutional muster, as Christians, you know, we aren't claiming to pray to some very generic God, right? We're praying to the God we know in Jesus Christ, and we're making very specific claims about who that God is and what that God's doing. And almost every chaplain I know who's done this prays differently in their church on Sunday morning than they do in the legislative chambers or the city council meeting, because they understand that the context is different. And then my question becomes, if they can't be authentically who they are in that context, because it wouldn't be appropriate in our democratic society, do we need those prayers at all? I mean, I know our politicians need our prayers, but I don't know that they need the pomp and circumstance of the chaplain's prayers, is kind of the question.
[32:40] Yeah, because I think that has been something that we've done, I don't know, probably since the country has existed. Oh, since the founding of the Constitutional Convention. Absolutely. Yeah. And so it is a question of does it make sense to do that? I think we do it partially because of history. It's just something we've always done. Maybe the question is, is it worthwhile to either side, whether that is for the state or for the church, how is it beneficial?
[33:22] Yeah, and I think what we're asking there is, for those legislative leaders, is it legitimating their actions in a way that they find valuable? You know, are they actually sitting there in reverence while that's going on and altering their behavior as a result of being reminded that they're doing something under the eyes of whatever is transcendent? For the, again, for the chaplains or those who adhere to those different faith traditions, what difference do they think it makes? I mean, I think it's a really interesting practice to interrogate, and I think it's much more symbolic than it is substantive. And I tend to err on the side of let's do what's substantive more than what's symbolic.
[34:07] Earlier when you were talking about the kind of the classic debate of having the flag in the sanctuary, you lifted up a model of how to deal with this. Because I think in the past when I've heard about it, it's usually not in that way. There's a lot of rancor. Um, usually that it's the, um, this is what the flag stands for or something to that extent. Um, instead of kind of, is this really where the proper place for a flag should be? Um, and I think it would be good to kind of expound on that because I think there are, um, partially because in our, our day, we don't always really calmly debate matters. Matters, it's usually attacking one another or attacking the other side. So, I mean, I guess how, you know, if you don't mind kind of repeating this, or if it sounds like it's repeating, but to have the discussion on this issue that really could help foster a change or help people see it from a different perspective.
[35:19] Yeah. So like I said, let's take this sort of example you bring up of there's a congregation with the flag in the sanctuary and i think we should you know there's a couple of things you can do right one is you can just leave it alone and not ever question it which then becomes this you know well that's that's an idol we can't talk about right or that's a sacred cow we can't touch um.
[35:42] So one is to just rip it out and see if anybody's noticed and pick the fight and see what happens, which I think is a very bad form of leadership. Or one is to really try to sort of create a mechanism for having a conversation that makes the community stronger, both in its faithfulness and perhaps in its sense of connection. And I think that you can do that, right? So I think you can say, let's talk about how this fight got there. Let's do some historical research. Again, we do some of this in the book. let's explain that story of how this flag even ended up here. Let's talk about what that flag means to people, and how much is that meaning tied to the worship we do in the sanctuary. I would suggest that nobody in that sanctuary thinks they're worshiping America, right? So the question is, why is there a felt need for that flag to stay in that sanctuary? And then two, let's also talk about where that flag is in the sanctuary. Not in all churches, But in most churches, the flag is supposed to be per the flag code in a particular place, and that place often ends up being right behind the pulpit. And so too often you end up having pastors who are preaching the gospel in front of the American flag, and the flag is their backdrop. And what that conveys in some sense is that they're giving this word that's supposed to be from the Lord, but it's a word from the Lord that looks like they're from America. And so I think we could also interrogate.
[37:07] But again, what is the flag conveying in the present that needs to have some thoughtfulness behind it? And as the congregation goes through those conversations in a way that is, again, doesn't have to be confrontational, but it can be collaborative, can be educational, maybe we can create space for a different conversation of, well, we don't need the flag there. Or the flag could be moved to the Fellowship Hall or some other area of the
[37:33] church that isn't as sacred of space. Um we can have a better understanding across generations of different interpretations of the flag we can be reminded of what worship is really all about i mean there's so much good that could come from that conversation if it's done well but too often it just isn't done well.
[37:54] Yeah and i would agree it's i i think and it's kind of on both sides and i think it's also So, though I think this is changing, is generations who have grown up with one way of understanding it. And I think that has to be dealt with with some care. Because a generation before had a very different understanding than younger generations might. And even if that might be the better, the current way might be the better way, you don't want to, I don't want to say offend, But you don't want to disrespect that older generation, understand where they're coming from. Even if you think this is the method that goes, there has to be a way of respecting them through this too.
[38:43] Yeah, no, you're exactly right. There was a whole generation that was told that to be a good Christian is to bring that flag to the sanctuary. And so there's a lot of, you know, this word is overused about, there's a lot of deconstruction that has to happen there, and that has to be done in a respectful way. And I would point out, not all, but in a lot of newer, non-denominational evangelical churches where the sanctuaries perhaps look a little more modern, the flags aren't there, right? So it's also interesting that even in—again, there's a historical lineage here that needs to be interrogated. One of the things that i in talking about this historically and you know kind of where you have your you're saying where you think christian nationalism began and where it's ending up, it seems that there's an interest in where.
[39:36] What part of christianity was kind of in the power structures i guess what i'm getting at that if we looked back at mid-century or last mid-century America, the mainline churches were the ones that were at the center of American society so that they were the ones that had more access to power in various ways. But if you fast forward 70 years, that it's now more evangelicals that have that kind of access to power, Whereas, you know, back in the 50s, they did not have that central, you know, path to power in that same way. Does any of this, I mean, where does the role of power have to do in any of this?
[40:29] So, your last part of that question cut out of me, Dennis, could you just repeat that last part? Yeah, I was just going to say, what is the role of power in all of this?
[40:39] Yeah, so I do think, and this is not where I'm an expert, but just from my observations, I do think that some of what is happening with the sort of more intensifying of Christian nationalism is the sense that a certain type of Christianity has lost some social power. And there's an attempt to, well, if we can't establish our primacy by vote or by whatever other sort of legitimate mechanism, we're going to engage in more authoritative actions because we don't want to lose power. Power um and i so i do think that's absolutely part of what's going on here with this phenomenon and i do think that even when we saw sort of a softer form of christian nationalism from mainliners in like the 20th century it was a reflection of power perhaps not as understood and not as um you know obviously asserted in some sense but really again an assumed power that people weren't recognizing um that they were influencing you know there was a lot of people People who were left out of conversations back then, and they were not even identified, right? It's not that people were realizing they were being excluded from the power structures. They just weren't even noticed. And so in some sense, we've made a lot of progress. We're noticing a lot more voices. We're recognizing their right to be in our democratic conversations today, and that's a fantastic thing.
[42:01] And yet we're also dealing with a time where the nation is becoming more pluralistic, more diverse, and we're seeing trends of secularization, and that's made a lot of people anxious, and Christian nationalism, I think, is one of those responses.
[42:20] Well, I kind of wrap up this conversation. One final question that I have is, where do you see this conversation going? We're, of course, in an election year where this issue of Christian nationalism is front and center. Where do you see churches getting involved in this conversation in the next few months and even in the next few years as we deal with and try to wrestle with what role does, how does the church and state kind of interplay in our society? Yeah, so we are obviously an election year, and a lot of pastors, myself included, are struggling with how do we have conversations on such a polarized world right now. The point of our book, it's meant to be a resource that could help, especially mainline churches, is because that's who we're talking about, but anybody who really wants to understand the issue better, to understand some of the history, understand some of the challenges and theological problems with Christian nationalism, and then to have a discussion about what they can do. So we do hope the book's a resource for pastors who don't know where to turn. We think it's gentle enough that it can be a fodder for good conversation. We think it's intelligent enough it'll teach people something, and we think it's prophetic enough that it'll help people realize like this is a really dangerous ideology that needs to be addressed in some form.
[43:49] My fear is that we're in for a rough ride here, and I do hope that Christians can remind themselves what their primary loyalty is, right? Our primary loyalty isn't to a particular party. It isn't even particular to a country. Our primary loyalty is to the God we know in Jesus Christ and to being disciples and living out God's ways and witnessing to God's reign with every fiber of our being. And I think that in such turbulent times, that's what we're called to do. And of course, the challenge is that every Christian is also a Republican or a Democrat, is also an American or a Canadian or a Mexican or whatever. We all carry multiple identities. But in some sense, this pushback on Christian nationalism is really an assertion that Christian identity needs to be first and foremost in people's lives. And hopefully, spending some time wrestling with some of the uncomfortable questions that Christian nationalism brings up is a way of making us more faithful followers of Jesus Christ.
[44:50] But if people want to learn a little bit more, obviously, I will definitely put in links for the book, Baptizing America, in the show notes. Where else can they follow you? Yeah, so if you're interested in the book, we really encourage you to pick it up at chalicepress.com and to use the code BAPODCAST for Baptizing America Podcast. That'll get you, I think it's like a third off the cover price. So it's going to be the cheapest place to buy it. And Brian and I both do some writing at a substack called A Public Witness. And the address for that is just publicwitness.wordandway.org. And I will definitely also put in the code in the show notes for people if they want to purchase the book. So Bo, thank you for taking the time to chat on this important topic. It was a really good time to kind of discuss this issue and hope to have you back here again. Thanks, Des. Appreciate you creating space for this conversation and to everybody for listening. All right. Take care.
[45:56] Music.
[46:31] So what did you think of Beau's argument? Did you agree or not? I would really like to hear from you. This is really an important issue and would love to hear people's views for or against. Drop me a line by sending an email to churchinmaine, all one word, at substack.com. Now, if you want to order the book, the link will be available in the show notes. And the link will actually go to Chalice Press, which is the publisher. If you use the code BAPodcast, so it's B as in boy, A as in apple, then podcast. So it's all one word. You will get a discount off of the price of the book. So just to let you know about that.
[47:20] I also want you to know that you can now donate to the podcast via Venmo, and you can do that by going to at church and main pod, and that's all one word, at church and main pod. And then you can also donate via Tip Top Jar, where you can leave any amount. Again, that link will be in the show notes. And you can also go to tiptopjar.com backslash electricparson. Your donation helps me to keep producing great episodes like this one. And as I said earlier, please consider rating and reviewing this episode, reviewing this episode on your favorite podcast app. So that others can find this podcast. And one more thing, consider passing this episode along to families and friends who might be interested. So with that, that is it for this episode of Church in Maine. I'm Dennis Sanders, your host. As I always like to say, thank you so much for listening. Take care, Godspeed, and I will see you very soon.
[48:32] Music.
Related Episodes
Beyond the Purple Church with Jack Haberer | Episode 194
Jack Haberer returns to talk about his latest book, ”Swimming with the Sharks: Leading the Full Spectrum Church in a Red and Blue World.”
President Biden and When to Step Aside with Loren Richmond Jr. | Episode 193
We discuss President Biden’s surprising exit from the 2024 race and touch on navigating cognitive decline in loved ones.
A Debate, An Assasination Attempt and Political Conventions with Robert Cornwall | Episode 192
Politics in 2024 isn’t boring. Robert Cornwall joins the pod to talk about recent events.
