A Defense of Christian Culture in the Post-Pandemic Era
The Rev. Dr. Harold Ristau in Ottawa. Photo by Yan Parisien @freedomportrait
By Harold Ristau
The public space has never been a theologically or morally neutral one; therefore, the Church has and will continue to heed the divine obligation to speak into it the holy Word of God. Only a godless culture would dare to claim that the public sphere is somehow neutral. The New Testament clearly announces the darkness of this present age (Eph 6:12). Yet, those who boldly lift their voices on behalf of the Church and her Lord in the public sphere, which is more important now than ever as we approach the final parousia, are facing intensifying persecution for doing so. Over the last few years, a frenetic buzz around Christian Nationalism has spread throughout our churches. Just as the apostle Paul evangelized more boldly in his most fiery trials, so also must we defend the traditional Christian and Lutheran response to anti-Christian public policy, rhetoric, and other subversive action against Christendom in our Christian vocations within all three estates.
In contrast to active Christian participation, the quietistic response of Christians today places a wedge between Church and state, claiming the role of the Church is limited to prayer, and that the role of a Christian is, at most, voting. This is neither Biblical nor Lutheran. In fact, it appears that those who most strongly advocate against Christian activity in the public sphere are the ones who failed to respond properly to the “pandemania” during the recent pandemic. They appear to hide behind the screed of Christian Nationalism as a reason to avoid participation in the public sphere and to justify, what amounts to a soft-antinomian behaviour.
Prior to COVID most of us had never heard of Christian Nationalism. Due to my participation in the peaceful protests of the Freedom Convoy in Canada in 2022, which sought to halt the government overreach of pandemic mandates into Christian lives and churches,[1] I was accused of being a Christian Nationalist by some local clergy who, instead of confessing that Christ is King of all realms of life, believed in a juxtaposition of “church” and “state.” I found the accusation to be laughable, as I was not aware the term existed, and I was not alone. Enemies of the Lord have made Christian Nationalism into a powerful gaslighting term which dissuades Christians from fulfilling their vocational duties in the civil sphere for fear of becoming persona non grata due to their concerns about immigration, abortion, or the abuse of children through peddlers of gender dysphoria. By distorting the language employed in public discourse, the godless manipulate the parameters of discussion within it. Christians who are unaware of these political tactics cannot effectively contend for the faith.[2] In a society that is ill-equipped to think logically due to the demise of Christian culture including “Western reason,” those who use Christian Nationalism as a slur are simply fear-mongering.
Upon closer examination, however, orthodox believers of goodwill will find that Christian Nationalism’s theological and political implications by no means fall afoul of the doctrine and practice of historic Christianity. As Dr. John Stephenson writes: “While for Luther in the Large Catechism ‘holy Christendom’ (ein heilige Christenheit) is the ‘best and clearest’ rendering of the credal article of faith in the one holy Church (LC II, 48; BS8 656,26), so that Christendom and Church are synonymous terms. Since Anglo-Saxon times this noun has also had the wider sense of the geographical area over which Christ holds sway. It denotes not only the Church stricte dicta but also connotes cultures suffused with the Christian ethos. Ostensibly neutral definitions of Christian Nationalism, such as that found in the Encyclopedia Britannica,[3] bristle with sarcasm as an alleged belief system is accorded pariah status as an “ideology.” Moreover, a series of linked developments on five continents over twenty centuries is flippantly dismissed. The incontestable influence of Christ and His Church on history and culture through Christianity, which has undeniably uplifted many nations, is scornfully waved away. It as the though the godless mean to say, “Who could ever think that Christianity might be an ‘integral part of some country’s ‘identity’? What fool examining the historical data would ‘create or maintain a legal fusion’ between certain countries and the religion practiced by a majority of their citizens?”[4]
The fear mongers have even gone so far as to malign Christian culture through its association with Christian Nationalism. Their views are frighteningly aligned with those who advance neo-Marxist ideas that judge Western culture and most of its vicissitudes, like Christian values, as harmful and destructive to society. As every Christian is well aware, the alternatives today have been revealed as anti-Christian, unveiled in the prevalence of Critical Theory which seeks to demonize Western civilization and Christendom, and to replace it with absurd alternatives that destroy the very pillars upon which the West is founded. Why would a Christian dispute the value of Christian culture and its aim to ensure that Christian principles, etiquette, and values, many of which are evident in natural law, underlay any honourable society? Without these in place, civilization crumbles into barbarianism. Even the new atheists appreciate the invaluable benefits of Christian civilization as the best option to all other alternatives.[5]
Clear illustrations of the horrific impact of the deterioration of Christian culture in the Western world, whether it be unsettling trends in public education or public policy, explains the increasing attractiveness of conservativism, traditionalism, common sense values and, in short, Christian culture. The popularity of Donald Trump can be attributed to what he represents: government accountability through an anti-establishment stance, a return to accountable governance, opposition to the secular religion of liberalism, and resistance to the threat of leftism. These political sentiments find counterparts in spiritual values based in the Holy Scriptures. Certainly, this fact should be self-evident among Christians, as any true Christian must, by definition, embrace a “conservative” worldview, which includes a political perspective, when it comes to the timelessness of God’s Law and Word.
Even the founding fathers of America did not boast a rigid separation of Church and state. The iconic language was intended to protect the life of the Church from overreach from the state, and not the other way around. The outlandish argument that the Two Kingdoms somehow coexist as two self-contained silos was foreign to our fathers. Luther is clear on the Church’s mandate to not only pray for, but to rebuke and advise the prince. The prince was required to protect the Church and the freedom to provide her services. Accordingly, faithful Christians are obligated to preserve and even advance Christian culture in the public sphere. Without it the safety and mission of Christ’s Church on earth is at risk. The Old and New Testaments are threaded with precedents. Whether Isaiah or Jeremiah, Joseph or David, the prophets warned government officials of the consequences of ungodly rule and kept them accountable. Luther’s distinction between two kinds of righteousness includes “civil righteousness,” which obviously assumes some level of Christian moral expression in the estate of the civil sphere. It cannot be overstated that up until the age of revolutions in the 18th century, the notion of a radical separation of church and state was absolutely inconceivable. Those Christians today who oppose envisioning our Triune God as Lord over both appear to be the same people that were all too eager, however inadvertently, to hand over on a silver platter that which is God’s to Ceasar during the irrational panic of the recent pandemic.
Whether or not we acknowledge it, all of us as citizens have religious beliefs that influence public policy and legislation at all levels of government. Those concerned that Lutherans would go too far in proclaiming God’s Word in the public sphere should consider how, according to their own descriptions of Christian Nationalism, St. John the Baptizer would come under their scrutiny. He is rightly praised as a martyr for implicitly, but not explicitly, standing for Christ. On behalf of the Church, he condemned the immoral behaviour of government officials of the day, and he was executed by the state. Christians should rejoice in the Holy Spirit’s call to “fight the good fight of faith” (2 Tim 4:7) even in the public sphere. The first preacher of the beloved Lutheran Hour, Rev. Dr. Walter A. Maier, addressed these same issues a century ago and arrived at the same conclusion:
Despite everything radicals may try to tell you, keep this basic truth firmly implanted in your mind: Our colonies, later the States, were settled by men and women who were Christians, who came to our shores, among other reasons, because they could here spread the Gospel, erect Christian churches, and worship the Savior according to His Word! Those early pioneers had their faults, of course, and I am not endeavoring to glorify something so far distant from us that its frailties cannot be seen; but for the most part, the people who built America were outstanding in their devotion to Christ. The Charter of Virginia assures its colonists the right to live together in "Christian peace" and instructs them to help "in propagating . . . the Christian religion to such people as yet live in ignorance of the true knowledge and worship of God." The Plymouth Charter specifies that the colony is established "to advance the enlargement of the Christian religion, to the glory of God Almighty." The Delaware Charter defines one purpose of that settlement as "the further propagation of the Holy Gospel." Maryland's Charter explains that its first settlers were moved by a "pious zeal for extending the Christian religion." The Massachusetts Bay Charter emphasizes that Boston was founded by men who wanted to bring the new world "to the knowledge and obedience of the only true God and the Savior of mankind." The early settlers of Pennsylvania came to America, according to their own declaration, for the spread of the "Christian religion." The Rhode Island Charter commits its people to the "true Christian faith and worship of God," and in the Rhode Island Compact the signers declare, "We submit our persons, lives, and estates unto our Lord Jesus Christ, the King of kings, and Lord of lords." The Connecticut Constitution in its preamble pledges the settlers to help "preserve the liberty and purity of the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ." The first article in the New Hampshire Charter begins: "We . . . in the name of Christ and in the sight of God." The oath that this instrument requires was to be administered in the name of "the Lord Jesus Christ, the King and Savior of His people."[6]
Clearly, rulers must take care to preserve, sustain, and advance the interests of Christ's Holy Church on earth, as well as ensure government overreach into religion is kept in check.[7] Even if one would dare to argue that communism and globalism meet the material needs of their constituents, they have consistently proven themselves to stifle and maim God’s beloved Creation, the Church, and the Gospel. Klaus Schwab, former leader of the World Economic Forum and considered one of the five most influential people on the globe,[8] had a clear agenda to penetrate world governments with such policies that subverted the interests of Christians.[9] Christians are wise to refrain from understating the influence of such deliberate agendas to silence Christ in the public sphere.[10] The accusatory shrieks of “Christian Nationalism” are often accompanied by squeals of “theocracy,” another term used to bludgeon Christ’s children when they dare to act politically. While we confess that ecclesiastical authority must not subsume political authority,[11] as with the medieval Roman Catholic system of Pope acting as head of church and state, we likewise confess that rulers should uphold right preaching of the Gospel and defend the Church against the devil’s wiles.[12] Therefore, we should be wary of the godless theocracy from leftist agendas that we find present in the supposedly neutral public space in America.
Religious beliefs underpin all political parties. During the recent US presidential election of 2024, one presidential candidate told hecklers professing the Lordship of Jesus that they were in the wrong rally, while the vice-presidential candidate of the other party instantly responded to the same cries with the confession, “Yes, Jesus is King.” During this same period, a portable abortion clinic welcomed attendees of the Democratic National Convention in Chicago. Only one Democrat congressman dared to vote for the Born-Alive Act passed in January 2025.[13] Lamentably, Harmeet Dhillon’s Sikh “prayer” was not the first of its kind at a Republican National Convention.[14] In the recent American election, Christians were free not to vote for Trump, but it was hardly justifiable for any of them to vote for his adversary based on her anti-Christian policy recommendations alone. To suggest that moral, and thus, political positions that are even loosely tied to Christian concerns are a matter of adiaphora is simply another antinomian heresy condemned by our Lord.[15]
The massive number of Christians involved in the peaceful protests during the 2021 Canadian Freedom Convoy in the nation’s capital stood against government overreach into Christian churches and families insisting that Ceasar’s usurpations be returned to God. It was an effort to maintain clear distinctions between Church and state where they were so obviously confused. The Christian participation in these loving and family-friendly protests—crime in the capital was at an all-time low since the homeless were also being fed by volunteers—was a commendable outcome of Christian faith at work in the public sphere, as is petition-writing and communicating with senators, governors, and elected officials between elections.
Ironically, movements such as the Canadian Freedom Convoy, unrightfully labelled as Christian Nationalism, represented refreshing reactions against leftist and socialist "anti-Christian Nationalism" such as the kind of Neo-Marxist nationalism of the Trudeau governmental abusive[16] regime. And this is precisely the point. There is no such thing as a neutral Left-Hand Kingdom. There is no such thing as neutral public space.
To reject "Christian culture" as a positive contribution to “secular” public space is to welcome any number of other religious cultures to take its place. When the former prime minister of Canada first came into office, he boasted that Canada has no shared values. “Canada is becoming a new kind of country, not defined by our history or European national origins, but by a “pan-cultural heritage.” “There is no core identity” as Canada is “the first post-national state.”[17] He also said, “There is a level of admiration I actually have for China because of their basic dictatorship.”[18] There is no ideal political system, including democracy, that can perfectly protect the holy ark of the Church in her wrestles with the waves of the world, but some forms are better than others. Christendom and Christian culture are natural consequence of active and lively Christian faith at work through the gathering of sanctified praying Christians. After all, faith produces good works. To deny or discourage the cultivation of the fruits of faith in the public square is to rob the Holy Spirit of opportunities to serve and evangelize through the hands, hearts, and minds of His holy people.
What fills the dark vacuum remaining when Christian culture is chased away? Look around you and see the bombardment of Western civilization once founded upon God’s Word and Christ’s Church. God is the sovereign Lord of all human institutions and history, and faith in God’s providence has never justified a retreat from vocational obligations in the public sphere and the gifts of God of which we are called to be godly stewards. Furthermore, Christians who criticize and discourage active Christian political participation indirectly embrace a national anti-Christian religion which unabashedly pursues the demise of the Kingdom of God and the Gospel on earth.
Which is a greater threat to Church and society: Christian Nationalism or Christian apathy?
[1] Quoting grom a CTCR document from 1965—which I know is a bit controversial, and a somewhat improved version of it was published in 1974—that sought to ensure that, in good Chalcedonian Christological logic, the relationship between the two kingdoms is expressed in a Biblical and balanced way, without separation and with confusion, but there are some golden nuggets of wisdom in there nevertheless such as this: “There may conceivably be times when the state goes beyond its God-given authority and requires of its citizens that which is contrary to their consciences and their individual religious convictions. In such cases the church reserves the right to protest. However, since the church always acknowledges the state to be a divine institution, it does not resort to force. From the Biblical point of view violence, force, rebellion, and revolution are rarely justified”. THE MISSION OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH IN THE WORLD: A Review of the 1965 Mission Affirmations. St. Louis: Commission on Theology and Church Relations of the Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod, 1974. p.7.
[2] We witnessed this during the abortion debate by allowing the dialogue to be framed by a rights-based versus responsibility-based language. In spite of the existence of any civil or even human rights, mankind has a responsibility to care for the innocent. Further, with homosexuality debate, by adopting the language of LGBTQ+, Christians add legitimacy to the absurdity of the concept of more than two genders, or multiple identities present in one human being.
[3] Christian nationalism, ideology that seeks to create or maintain a legal fusion of Christian religion with a nation’s character. Advocates of Christian nationalism consider their view of Christianity to be an integral part of their country’s identity and want the government to promote—or even enforce—the religion’s position within it.
[4] From an early draft of Rev. Dr. John Stephenson’s, Aphorisms on Christendom haunted by the Specter of ‘Christian Nationalism’, Ad Crucem, 2025.
[5] When Constantine “Christianized” Roman society, he improved it , making it a better version of the Roman society by asserting human dignity, equality between men, banning murderous sports in the colosseum, and offering care to the poor such as slaves, to name just a few. The Church has always aimed at improving the Left-Hand kingdom so that it better aligns with Biblical principles, which simply are supported by natural law, and, until recently, were not controversial in the least. Through such acts of love experienced in temporal society, countless sinners have been directed to Christ and come to eternal salvation.
[6] KEEP AMERICA CHRISTIAN! A sermon by Dr. Walter A. Maier. First Aired January 1942. https://branscome.org/KeepAmer.htm
[7] The founding fathers of America insisted upon deliberate and institutionalized checks and balances in the careful formation of American governance due to the acknowledge of human sinfulness, which, incidentally, is absent or minimalized in socialistic forms of government. A healthy suspicion of government is derived from Holy Writ: “all men are liars” (Psalm 116:11) and “Put not your trust in princes” (Psalm 146:3).
[8]Seamus Bruner, Controligarch: Exposing the Billionaire Class, their Secret Deals, and the Globalist Plot to Dominate Your Life. Hardcover (Sentinel, 2023). p. 88.
[9]“In 2017 Klaus Schwab who heads the World Economic Forum declared, ‘What we are very proud of, is that we penetrate the global cabinets of countries with our WEF Young Global Leaders … But what we are very proud of now is the young generation like Prime Minister (Justin) Trudeau … We penetrate the cabinet. So yesterday I was at a reception for Prime Minister Trudeau, and I know that half of his cabinet, or even more than half of his cabinet, are actually Young Global Leaders.” Terence Corcoran. “In Canada, follow the money + the ideas” in Financial Post. Feb 18, 2022. Accessed Jan 1, 2025.
https://financialpost.com/opinion/terence-corcoran-in-canada-follow-the-money-the-ideas
[10] See Megan Basham, Shepherds for Sale: How Evangelical Leaders Traded the Truth for a Leftist Agenda (Broadside Books, 2024).
[11] AC XXVIII.
[12] The Magdeburg Confession: With Historical Introduction and Annotations. Translated by Christian Preus. Concordia Publishing House, 2025. Pg. 85-108.
[13] https://www.newsweek.com/democrat-henry-cuellar-born-alive-act-2020047
[14] https://religionnews.com/2024/07/17/conservatives-balked-at-rncs-diverse-religious-voices-but-its-an-old-tradition/
[15] See Luke 11:23; 12:35-48.
[16] "Abusive" since the Emergencies Act which was deployed against peaceful protesters portrayed as terrorists by the government funded and subsidized Canadian media (except for a few Christian independent media which the government continues to target, dismantle, and discredit it) used by Trudeau to crush the protests was deemed unconstitutional, in a Federal law suit, of which one author of this article was a successful litigator, contributing to the continued demise of this abusive and anti-Christian government.
[17] Candice Malcolm. “Trudeau says Canada has no ‘core identity’” in Toronto Sun. Sept 14, 2016. Accessed Jan 1, 2025. https://torontosun.com/2016/09/14/trudeau-says-canada-has-no-core-identity
[18] Patrick Amborse, “The Legacy of Justin Trudeau.” Notes from the North, June 29, 2023. https://notesfromthenorth.ca/the-legacy-of-justin-trudeau/. Accessed April 17, 2025.