Don't Sleep On Christian Nationalism

Click here and copy & paste the link to share this newsletter and view online.

Steve Sheffey's Pro-Israel Political Update

Calling balls and strikes for the pro-Israel community since 2006

Join The Mailing List

Donate

July 26, 2026

Key Developments and What We're Discussing Today:

Rep. Jared Huffman's (D-CA) forthcoming book, No Prophets: The Fight To Save Democracy From Christian Nationalism, is mandatory reading for anyone who wants to understand the state--and stakes--of American politics today.

In No Prophets, Huffman shows that Christian nationalism is a major, sometimes violent threat to our democracy that has not received nearly the attention that it deserves.

The main section of today's newsletter is my review of his book and my interview with him.

Whether you're of any religion or no religion, you can support my work by chipping in via credit card (you do not need a PayPal account), Zelle (contact me for info), Venmo @Steven-Sheffey (last four digits, 9479), or check.

Friends,

I read an advance copy of Rep. Jared Huffman's (D-CA) forthcoming book, No Prophets: The Fight To Save Democracy From Christian Nationalism. It comes out on August 18, but you can and should pre-order it. It is mandatory reading for anyone who wants to understand the state--and stakes--of American politics today.

Huffman is the founding member of the Freethought Caucus, which he co-chairs with Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), who wrote the foreword to No Prophets. Huffman was raised Mormon and is now the only openly atheist member of Congress. His sister is a Haredi Jew who lives in Israel.

In No Prophets, Huffman shows that Christian nationalism is a major, sometimes violent threat to our democracy that has not received nearly the attention that it deserves. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) is not the only Republican who displays a Christian nationalist flag outside his office--at least 20 Republican members of Congress have joined him.

Huffman describes in No Prophets how Liz Cheney managed to erase the major role played by Christian nationalism in the January 6 insurrection from the House Select Committee's January 6 845-page report, describing her successful cover-up as "a major national security blunder that left our country more vulnerable to what has now become America's most dangerous political movement."

Describing the difference between Democrats and Republicans, Huffman writes that "Republicans are a Christian monolith: 100 percent of senators and 98% of House members are Christian," whereas the Democratic Caucus includes "not only devout Christians and Jews, but also Muslims, Hindus, a Buddhist, and a smattering of agnostics and infidels like me."

I would add that no Jewish governors are Republicans, no Jewish U.S. senators are Republicans, and that in the U.S. House, of the 25 Jewish members, only four are Republicans.

Christian nationalism might be the most dangerous force in American politics. We ignore it at our peril. Huffman, quoting Sinclair Lewis, reminds us that "when fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." Think about the images from January 6. No Prophets is a must-read.

Last week, I asked Huffman some questions about Christian nationalism and his book. As interesting as the Q&A is, it is no substitute for reading the book.

How do you define “Christian nationalism” and what is its goal in America?

Christian nationalism is an ideology that fuses a particular brand of Christian identity with right-wing politics. At its core is the false narrative that the United States was founded as a “Christian nation” and that this supposed origin entitles Christians to favored status in law, culture, and government. Christian nationalism exists on a spectrum of thought and intensity.

At one end are true religious believers – people whose dominionist or Christian supremacist theology teaches that imposing Christian theocracy on the rest of us is their religious duty. These zealots played a huge, yet widely overlooked role in planning and carrying out the January 6th insurrection, and they’ve grown stronger since then.

In the middle of the spectrum are millions of people who don’t necessarily read the Bible or go to church, but embrace Christian nationalism as a sort of cultural marker. They identify with the narrative of rapid demographic and social changes taking “our country” away. This group can be just as militant and violent as the true believers, but it’s driven mostly by grievances over culture, race, and economics, not theology.

Finally, there are mild Christian nationalists like your Aunt Mable: devout conservatives who simply vote for politicians that share their faith but would never put on tactical gear and storm the Capitol. I don’t worry much about the Aunt Mables of the world violently overthrowing democracy.

You write about several different, partially competing, strands of Christian nationalism in your book. How has Donald Trump managed to hold them all together? Do you think that JD Vance, Marco Rubio, and Ted Cruz would be able to hold this coalition together?

Yes, with the help of some top-tier religion scholars, I spend an entire chapter unpacking the theology behind the three ascendant religious subcultures driving MAGA Christian nationalism. Which is very important, because this movement is not just about power or money – it is shaped by religious beliefs that must be understood.

As I explain in the book, the Big Three of MAGA Christianity are: 1) radical traditionalist Catholics or “Rad Trads” (think Nick Fuentes or Candace Owens); 2) a group of reconstructionist Protestants also known as the “Theo Bros” (think Pete Hegseth or Doug Wilson); and 3) the biggest and most powerful faction, charismatic evangelicals led by the self-declared prophets known as the New Apostolic Reformation (think Paula White, Trump’s White House Spiritual Advisor).

Each of these factions embraces a form of Christian supremacist theology that demands functional or outright theocracy and rejects pluralism. They are united by a disdain for secularism, liberal culture, modernity and democracy.

But they have major theological disagreements that could easily turn them against each other. Trump, the most irreligious President in history, is the unlikely glue that holds this volatile coalition together. Because he doesn’t belong to any of the factions, each of them essentially sees him as their own. As I explain in the book, it will be very difficult for any Republican that comes after Trump to replicate this feat because all of the contenders belong to one of the three religious factions, which creates friction and mistrust with the other two.

One of the most fascinating parts of your book is that the purple team’s report on the role of Christian Nationalism in the January 6 insurrection was excluded from the report at the demand of Liz Cheney. Why did the committee accede to her request and what were the key takeaways? Will it ever see the light of day?

This is a remarkable untold story that I use as a case study in Christian privilege -- perhaps our greatest obstacle in confronting the Christian nationalist movement. In the summer and fall of 2022, as the House Select Committee on the January 6th insurrection was racing to complete its final report, the staff divided into color-coded teams to write up draft chapters on different aspects of the insurrection.

The purple team was charged with writing about right-wing extremist groups, including the mountain of evidence the committee had collected on Christian nationalism. Liz Cheney – whose courage in standing up to Trump is something we tend to praise – did the country a grave disservice here. As the Republican Vice Chair of the Select Committee, she gave the committee the bipartisan credibility it critically needed. This gave her veto power over anything she didn’t want to see in the final report. She used that power to demand that any scrutiny – indeed, even any mention – of the Christian nationalist movement or the fanatical faith leaders who helped spearhead the insurrection was scrubbed from the report.

Other members of the committee objected, including several Democrats and the other Republican, Adam Kinzinger. They wanted the full purple team report to be included. But Cheney would not budge. So, instead of a comprehensive final report that exposed the Christian nationalist movement for the dangerous menace that it is, the country got an incomplete picture of the insurrection and the unhinged religious architects behind the January 6th coup were allowed to regroup, grow stronger, and continue radicalizing their Christian shock troops for future attacks.

Will we ever see the purple team’s draft? Probably not. I tried to get it, but most interim work product was lost or destroyed in the committee’s final rush to complete the report before Republicans took over the House majority. None of my colleagues or the staffers I spoke with had retained copies, but all of them confirmed that the document pointed to Christian nationalism as a major factor in the insurrection.

Is Christian nationalism the driving force behind the MAGA movement or is it simply a belief that many who support MAGA happen to share?

I contend that it is the single most powerful driver of the MAGA movement -- the connective tissue that holds disparate strands of MAGA together. And the religious part of Christian nationalism is the core of that power.

Right-wing Christian leaders, especially those associated with the New Apostolic Reformation, have built a sophisticated political machine capable of mobilizing millions of passionate believers into action like nothing else in American politics. This is what lifted Trump into the White House in 2016, largely because of a prophecy that went viral among evangelicals: In their telling, God had anointed Trump, the sinful billionaire, to be the unlikely vessel to save His chosen people, just like the pagan King Cyrus in the Bible. (If you don’t believe me, just Google “King Cyrus Donald Trump temple coin” to see the way evangelicals not only embraced but merchandised this prophecy.)

The failed assassination attempts only intensified their belief in Trump’s prophetic destiny. That belief is now virtually unshakable. It’s beyond politics and detached from rationality, which is why nothing Trump says or does ever seriously threatens their devotion to him.

What can the Democratic Party and the average American voter do to combat Christian nationalism?

It starts with understanding how dangerous the Christian nationalist movement is. That’s one of the points of my book. Next, we need more Americans talking about violent Christian extremism the same way they would discuss any other unhinged movement.

Americans are comfortable condemning religious extremism and violence in foreign deserts, and sometimes in our own country when it wears a hijab. But our cultural reflex to presume all things “Christian” are good leaves us dangerously vulnerable to a movement that seeks to strip away our rights and destroy our democracy. This is why I share the story of what Liz Cheney did to the Select Committee’s report, along with other examples of how Christian privilege has blinded us to grave domestic security threats.

Finally, we need to build a broad pro-democracy coalition of all faith perspectives. There’s an emerging schism in American Christianity. Moderate and progressive Christians are starting to push back on Christian nationalists whom they believe have hijacked their faith.

But the good Christians can’t win this fight alone – and even if they could, the fate of our democracy shouldn’t be decided by which type of Christianity we want to dominate our politics. I argue in the book for a broad, interfaith, pro-democracy coalition: Christians, non-Christians, and the growing community of non-religious and secular Americans all working together to save democracy and protect everyone’s religious liberty. Ultimately, that’s what it’s going to take.

You mentioned that the one goal of Christian nationalism is conversion for all Jews following the fulfillment of the Biblical promises of war and the end of days, and that this drives much Republican support for the messianic, right-wing expansionist government in Israel. How do you reconcile Christian nationalist support for Trump with Trump’s seeming to crack down on Israel’s plans to attack Iran and Israel’s desire to continue fighting in Lebanon?

This is a rumbling fault line in right-wing Christianity that could soon blow the entire MAGA movement apart. It goes back to the “big three” religious subcultures. The biggest one (charismatic evangelicals) is steeped in Christian Zionism and maximalist support for Israel based on biblical prophecies. The other two subcultures have antisemitism coursing through them. They’ve long had mixed feelings, at best, about Israel.

My chapter on Christian Zionism explains the inevitable reckoning within the MAGA coalition and what it could mean for Trump, Israel, AIPAC, and the Christian nationalist movement. Christian Zionism has been a driving force in U.S. foreign policy and right-wing politics in recent years.

For Netanyahu and some Israelis, the hard-core support of these conservative Christians is appealing, but ultimately Christian Zionists don’t want self-determination for Israel and the Jewish people: They insist Jews must eventually convert to Christianity and they intend for Israel to be the center of a global Christian kingdom. This chapter was one of the most challenging to write, but also one of the most important – not just because it delves into these emerging fractures but because it spotlights a glaring example of how church-state separation is being undermined by bible-as-policy governance.

What would you say to those in the pro-Israel community who think that it doesn’t matter why Republicans support Israel’s government as long as they do?

Be careful. Read the fine print in the contract of convenience with Christian Zionists. Or just read my book!

[Huffman notes in his book that "Christian Zionists are so hyped with biblical zeal that they reflexively support Israel's most extreme and contentious actions, rushing in where even AIPAC fears to tread," and he provides examples.]

Did Republicans choose Mike Johnson for Speaker because he is an ardent Christian nationalist, or was that just a bonus?

I write quite a bit about Speaker Johnson in the book because he’s a major Christian nationalist power player and a true believer. He’s been deeply entrenched in the legal and political power structure of right-wing Christianity for his entire career, and his personal beliefs and professional background are nothing short of radical – far more extreme than most people realize.

In a normal era, a fanatic like him could never become Speaker of the House – 2nd in line to the Presidency. But Johnson stumbled into it and, because of all the chaos following the ouster of Speaker Kevin McCarthy, he was elected almost summarily, without serious vetting or public scrutiny.

But as much as Johnson is the accidental Speaker, the fact that he had enough votes to win, and that he’s held the position for the past two years, says something. His radical background and extreme beliefs are not considered fringe or a political liability in today’s MAGA Republican Party – they are mainstream.

It seems surprising, at least to me, that atheism is still stigmatized in American politics, even in the Democratic Party. When we spoke in April, you said it is stigmatized even more than sexual orientation or race. Why does atheism evoke such strong reactions in both parties? Does that prove that America is, in fact, a Christian nation?

The stigma is fading, but still significant. And you’re right, polls still show “atheist” as one of the worst labels for a political candidate to have. America is changing rapidly, becoming much less religious and less Christian all the time. Voters are increasingly open to non-Christians in public office, but there’s still a lingering assumption that morality requires religion – so voters see religious affiliation by candidates as a proxy for morality. I believe that too will change as more “nones” and secularists overcome the stigma and win elections. Americans will see that these people can be not only very moral but also good public servants who should be judged on their work, not religious labels.

How do you reconcile the Constitution’s clear prohibition against establishing religion with “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance, “In God We Trust” on our currency, prayer breakfasts in Congress, Bible study groups in Congress, and certain Christian holidays being designated as national holidays?

This is the slippery slope to theocracy, and Christian nationalists are working hard to take us further down that hill. They have always understood that seemingly innocuous things like religious symbols, ceremonies, slogans and holidays are gateways to further religious encroachment into government because they habituate us, gradually blurring the line between church and state until at some point – if we allow it – the line becomes meaningless.

Much of what you mention came about long after our founders were in the grave – a lot of it during the Cold War, when Americans were eager to burnish their Christianity to show we were morally superior to the godless communists of the Soviet Union. Some of it may be harmless, but the Constitution’s secular firewalls – Article VI’s ban on religious tests and the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause – have always been tested, resisted, and occasionally breached.

The Supreme Court has given mixed rulings over the years, and we now have a conservative SCOTUS majority that is trying to emasculate the Establishment Clause. They and their Christian nationalist allies are chipping away at Jefferson’s “wall of separation” between church and state. If you’re a conservative Christian, that might seem fine, but for the rest of us, it should be a call to action to defend one of the most critical bulwarks of democracy that has protected us from religious tyranny for more than two centuries.