The Admin (@unconscionableAdmin)

Quote posting so I can farm likes on a good conversation. :gabsmile: But in all seriousness, I did want to make a broader point. I think this conversation is why officially adopting the "Christian Nationalism" label makes a big difference in our political approach. I am interested in classical two-kingdom protestant political theology, and using the Christian Nationalist label clarifies the extent to which I am willing to work with someone. Both the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox traditions will only be able to assist in common political goals for a time. But in order for them to "take the helm" of Christian Nationalism, they would need to deny the very definition of the movement. In other words, the pan-protestant movement only exists because of protestant political theory. The political theology that allows many denominations to work together is the same political theology that the roman catholic church denied at the Reformation. So, for a Catholic to truly be a part of the Christian Nationalist movement, they would need to dissent from their own denomination. In a way, the problem takes care of itself: Either they leave the Catholic Church, or they leave Christian Nationalism. Not that you asked for further reading, but I found this discussion of Luther's "three walls" enlightening, as it showcases the fundamental difference in goals between Protestants and Catholics. > "Luther’s arguments, culminating in the practical exhortation to have the king convene a council, do away with this imperialism in place for a nationalist project that allows independent nations to determine the best practice of true religion. Nationalism, here, emerges as a rejection of Roman Catholic imperialism and an outworking of the priesthood of believers to interpret and apply God’s Word in their own lands." -- https://americanreformer.org/2023/08/must-protestants-be-liberals/