It appears we can tolerate wickedness of the worst kind in this country (and keep silent about it), but if you mention something about CN and the Kingship of Christ over all things, then many Christian leaders go crazy with rage. You may be disciplined by the church for holding to such a heresy.  Whoever would have thought that to apply the Law of God to the civil realm would ever be controversial, especially among Presbyterians?  Whoever would have thought that the Kingship of Christ over all areas of life, including the civil magistrate, would be controversial, especially among Presbyterians?  But that is the way it is, and no study committee is going to solve that.

There are two overtures coming to the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) 52^nd General Assembly, June 23-27, 2025, asking for a study committee on Christian Nationalism (CN). One overture is from South Texas Presbytery and the other is from Arizona Presbytery.  As my dear friends might expect, I have an opinion on these overtures.  Contrary to the apparent intent of the overtures to reign in something considered out of control in some of our churches, I believe that the report of a study committee will have the opposite intended effect. It may very well increase the attractiveness of CN.

A study committee will not settle the issue, and it may expose many of our young men to biblical concepts that they have never considered before (even in seminaries).  When the PCA is called upon to study church history, reexamine biblical texts, and do word studies outside of the American experience, they may end up where I am—sympathetic to CN.  Just a warning!

Their first problem will be defining the phrase “Christian Nationalism.”  When the term became popular in the PCA, I wrote an article in The Aquila Report (Christian Nationalism – Dump the Term While We Still Can, Sept. 20, 2022) opposing the use of the phrase.  Since that time, I have concluded there is no other phrase that calls attention to what I consider the biblical concept underpinning the term. I probably would prefer “Christian Federalism,” but that is another article for another time.

There are two other options today contrary to CN.  They are R2K theology and Principled Pluralism. R2K (Radical Two Kingdom) theology limits the rule of Christ to the visible church only.  The civil magistrate must rule by what is called “natural law.”  The Church and the State are two kingdoms under two different laws. The Church deals with spiritual matters and the state with material matters.  A Christian Nation where the civil magistrate is responsible to legislate good and evil according to the Bibe is unthinkable.

The other option is Principled Pluralism.  This is quite popular in Baptist circles, but it has become almost sacrosanct in Presbyterian circles, too. Freedom of conscience is the ultimate principle, and America as a democracy must not discriminate in the civil realm against any other religions or any other gods.  All religions compete and the best one wins.  That’s the American way.  It’s kind of a free-market approach.  To the victors go the spoils. Therefore, America must make room for Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, etc. We must protect freedom of conscience at all costs.  No “King Jesus only.”  Please, that is out of bounds!

So, in the theory of Principled Pluralism, Democracy is sacred and every individual has the right to choose their own god.  This is the basic principle which must guarantee the pluralism of all religions in the United States. Also, remember that religion is a private matter. America can build a successful nation without recognizing the God of the Bible as our ruler over all of life.  Principled Pluralism in the minds of many provides a roadmap to security and freedom.  It is the American way.

The only problem with this is that it was tried once at the Tower of Babel.  Without the Kingship of Christ over all things, men who think they can build an utopia on earth without the God of the Bible as our ruler and king will ultimately fail, and will be judged by God. A house divided against itself will not long endure.

The third option is CN.  CN is really nothing new.  It was the accepted biblical view in the United States up until post-World War 2.  Our soldiers used to fight for a Christian Nation, but with the post-war consensus they began fighting for democracy and principled pluralism.

Christianity was debunked as our national religion, and we settled for a neutral attitude toward religion in the civil realm. Thus, as a result of a post WW2 consensus, including the revolution of the 1960s, the Sabbath Day was desecrated, homosexual marriage became legal, men started acting like women (and vice versa), abortion was provided on demand, and now we accept the sexual mutilation of children as being a civil right.  Well, that is real progress under Principled Pluralism and R2K Theology, isn’t it!  Trump is trying to reverse some of these applications of both R2K and Principled Pluralism, but he has no personal Christian worldview as a basis for what he is doing.

Any study committee on CN will have to deal with the biblical concept of a “nation.”  What is a nation?  The Great Commission instructed us to disciple the nations (not just a few elect from various nations). The goal of Christian missions is to capture the nations for Christ (Japan, China, Russia, the United States, etc.) and to teach them to legislate Christian principles in the civil realm as the rule of law. This is real biblical missions. We do this by preaching the cross and the kingship of Christ. Anything less is problematic.

If a person studies the history of nations, the American concept of a nation consisting of numerous mini-nations is inherently contradictory by definition. America is a new experience in the relationship between the church and the state. If we divide America into two time periods (before WW2 and after WW2) the old America is gone, and we have been living under the new America now for around 80 years. We are reaping the results of the New America and this is evident in our laws, in our political parties, and in our universities. This why we are so divided.

Christian leaders are concerned about the rise of wickedness in our country, but they are willing to live with it in the civil realm (freedom of religion). It appears we can tolerate wickedness of the worst kind in this country (and keep silent about it), but if you mention something about CN and the Kingship of Christ over all things, then many Christian leaders go crazy with rage. You may be disciplined by the church for holding to such a heresy.

Whoever would have thought that to apply the Law of God to the civil realm would ever be controversial, especially among Presbyterians?  Whoever would have thought that the Kingship of Christ over all areas of life, including the civil magistrate, would be controversial, especially among Presbyterians?  But that is the way it is, and no study committee is going to solve that.

Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.