What do religious texts and the Constitution actually say about Christian nationalism — the movement to align the U.S. government with a particular Christian identity?
On the substantive religious question, mainstream Christian theology has historically been wary of merging church and state — and many of the most vocal contemporary critics of Christian nationalism are Christian leaders, including nearly 400 clergy who signed a 2026 Ash Wednesday letter calling it a heretical distortion of the gospel. On the constitutional question, Article VI, the First Amendment, and the Treaty of Tripoli converge: the Founders had the opportunity to establish the United States as a Christian nation, and they explicitly chose not to. Christians retain robust protection to practice their faith, advocate their values, and shape public life through ordinary democratic participation. What the Constitution prohibits — and what mainstream Christian theology has often warned against — is using government power to establish a particular religious identity as the official identity of the country.
Religious perspectives
This is one of the rare questions where the religious answer is more pointed than the constitutional answer — because many of the strongest critics of Christian nationalism are Christians themselves, often citing the New Testament directly.
What Christian nationalism claims: The movement generally holds that the United States was founded as a Christian nation, that Christianity should hold a privileged position in American law and culture, and (in stronger forms like the Seven Mountains Mandate) that Christians should seek to dominate the "seven mountains" of cultural influence: government, business, media, arts, education, family, and religion. Adherents in elected office include Speaker of the House Mike Johnson.
What the New Testament actually says about political power: Jesus rejected political kingship repeatedly. When the crowd tried to make him king by force, he withdrew (John 6:15). When Satan offered him "all the kingdoms of the world," he refused (Matthew 4:8-10). He told Pilate: "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight" (John 18:36). When asked about Roman taxation, he said: "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's" (Matthew 22:21) — explicitly separating the political and the spiritual.
The early church's posture: For its first three centuries, Christianity grew without political power. The shift came when Constantine merged church and state in the 4th century — a development many Christian theologians (Augustine, the Anabaptists, Roger Williams, modern theologians like Stanley Hauerwas) have argued was a corruption of the gospel rather than its fulfillment. The history of state-enforced Christianity — the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Wars of Religion, the persecution of dissenters — is cautionary even within Christian self-understanding.
What contemporary Christian leaders say: In February 2026, nearly 400 reverends, bishops, and theologians signed an Ash Wednesday letter calling white Christian nationalism "a heretical ideology" and "a distortion of the gospel of Jesus." Christians Against Christian Nationalism, a coalition of thousands of clergy, has called the movement "a threat to American democracy" and a misuse of Christian identity. The Southern Baptist Convention's ethics commission has expressed concerns. Catholic Bishop Robert Barron has criticized aspects of the movement. Pope Francis has explicitly addressed the rise of religious nationalism globally.
The Baptist tradition specifically: Baptists historically were among the most vocal advocates of church-state separation — not because they were lukewarm Christians but because they were persecuted ones. Roger Williams (founder of Rhode Island), John Leland, and the early Baptist movement insisted on separation precisely to protect authentic faith from state corruption. "A wall of separation between Church & State" — Jefferson's famous phrase — was a direct response to a Baptist congregation's concerns about state religious favoritism.
Other religious traditions:
- Judaism: American Jews have particular reason to be alert to Christian-nationalist movements, given the historical experience of religious states that defined Jews as outsiders. The principle of dina d'malkhuta dina requires Jews to support legitimate civic order, but Jewish tradition has been historically and consistently pro-separation in the American context.
- Islam: American Muslims are similarly affected by movements that frame the U.S. as essentially Christian. The Quranic principle "no compulsion in religion" (2:256) cuts against state religious establishment of any kind, including Islamic ones.
- Buddhism and other traditions: Religious minorities of every kind have an interest in the state remaining genuinely religiously neutral.
The "Christian heritage" claim: Many Americans, including most Christian nationalists, point to the religious convictions of many Founders and the religious motivations of many American institutions. This is historically true — and it is also true that the same Founders explicitly chose not to establish Christianity in the Constitution. They could have. They didn't. Both facts matter.
The substantive disagreement: Christian Americans of good faith disagree about how Christian values should inform public life. The narrower question — whether the state should privilege Christianity over other faiths or no faith — has a clearer answer in mainstream Christian theology and in the Constitution.
Constitutional & legal framework
The constitutional question has a clearer textual answer than the political controversy might suggest.
Article VI, Clause 3: "No religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." The only mention of religion in the original (un-amended) Constitution is a prohibition on religious tests for office. The Founders had the opportunity to establish Christianity as the official religion of the United States. They explicitly chose not to.
First Amendment Establishment Clause: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." Adopted in 1791 as part of the Bill of Rights, the clause prohibits government from establishing, endorsing, or favoring any religion — including Christianity.
First Amendment Free Exercise Clause: "...or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Christians (and adherents of every other faith) retain robust protection to practice their religion, advocate for their values, and form religious communities — all without state establishment.
The Treaty of Tripoli (1797): Article 11 of this Senate-ratified treaty stated: "The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion." The treaty was ratified unanimously by the Senate during the Adams administration. The text was widely circulated in American newspapers and produced no significant public controversy at the time.
James Madison's "Memorial and Remonstrance" (1785): The principal architect of the First Amendment argued at length that government-supported religion corrupts both government and faith. His specific concern: that establishment of Christianity (which he supported as a private religious matter) would weaken authentic Christianity itself. The argument is theological as much as political.
Recent Supreme Court doctrine: The Court has, particularly in recent terms, allowed somewhat more religious expression in public contexts (Kennedy v. Bremerton, 2022; Carson v. Makin, 2022) than the mid-20th century cases (Engel v. Vitale, 1962; Lemon v. Kurtzman, 1971) had permitted. None of this approaches official establishment. The Court has never authorized — and the Constitution's text does not permit — a state-sponsored religious identity for the United States.
The Seven Mountains Mandate and Project 2025: The Seven Mountains Mandate explicitly seeks Christian dominance over the seven specified spheres of cultural influence. Several Project 2025 proposals — including the first federal school voucher program (signed July 2025, routing public dollars to private and religious schools) — align with Seven Mountains goals. Each specific policy must be evaluated on its own merits; the underlying ideology of Christian dominance over American institutions is a different question, and one the Constitution's text directly addresses.
The Speaker Johnson question: Speaker Mike Johnson has rejected the term "Christian nationalism" as derogatory while explicitly affirming that the United States is a "Christian nation." His public statements and his association with leaders of the Seven Mountains and related movements have been documented in congressional reporting. Whatever one calls the underlying view, the constitutional analysis remains the same: officeholders can hold any religious views they wish, but they cannot use government to establish those views as official.
The "religious heritage" vs. "religious establishment" distinction: It is accurate to say that American culture has been deeply shaped by Christianity, that many Founders were Christians, that Christian values informed the moral framework of the founding, and that American institutions have Christian roots. It is also accurate that the Constitution explicitly prohibits the establishment of any religion. Both are true. Christian nationalism collapses the first set of facts into a denial of the second, treating religious heritage as if it required religious establishment.
See: Article VI (No Religious Test) → | First Amendment → | Treaty of Tripoli, Article 11 →
Sources cited:BibleBuddhismConstitutionSupreme Court