Within the churning currents of contemporary discourse, the label “Christian Nationalist” is fast being perverted, reshaped into a tool of ideological strife. At the forefront of those bending this term to their will is Kristin Kobes Du Mez, a history professor at the apostate Calvin University, an institution historically tied to the Reformed tradition yet navigating the crosscurrents of contemporary thought.

Du Mez, who identifies with the Christian faith, strides a progressive path and has risen to prominence in part through her critique encapsulated in her works such as “Jesus and John Wayne: How White Evangelicals Corrupted a Faith and Fractured a Nation,” where she absurdly argues that modern evangelicalism, particularly among conservatives, has been co-opted by “toxic masculinity” and nationalist fervor, rather than “Christ-like teachings.”

Du Mez’s commentary frequently intersects with the left’s “woke” ideologies—a term coined to denote a worldview in line with leftist and Marxist social agendas—and she openly aligns with causes championed by progressive circles, such as expansive definitions of gender and sexuality, and a re-examination of historical narratives from a lens that emphasizes systemic injustices. Employed by a “Christian” academic institution, she utilizes her platform and “scholarly” pursuits to advocate for these causes while attempting to position them as congruent Christianity.

The new Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, has a personal and professional trajectory characterized by a staunch affirmation of the foundational biblical doctrines of life, matrimony, and family unity. While far from perfect, still, to the progressive contingent, Johnson’s loyalty to these biblical precepts earns him the pejorative moniker of “Christian Nationalist” by leftists like Du Mez, a label they have laced with ominous implications. Contrary to the accusations of his detractors, Johnson, along with many like-minded conservative believers, has not sought to meld nationalism with his faith. Instead, his aim has been to allow the moral directives of his faith to guide his actions in service to the nation.

The modus operandi of his opponents is crystal clear: by lumping all strands of conservative Christianity into a single, indistinguishable category, these progressives strategize to cultivate an environment in which any Christian dissenting from their platform—whether it be on issues of sexuality, the sanctity of life, the boundaries of free expression, or the right to bear arms—is swiftly categorized as radical. Under this distorted perception, to champion the verities of the Bible is to stand in opposition to notions of progress, liberty, and even charity.

However, those on the progressive left recognize no nuance within the spectrum of conservative Christian thought. They overlook the breadth of perspectives, the spectrum of political participation, and the varied methodologies of engaging with society that exist among those who adhere to the Bible as their ultimate guide. Rather, any who challenge the progressive ideology or endeavor to practice their faith openly in society are labeled as societal menaces.

In their efforts, they aim to rewrite the story of faith in our culture. Progressive figureheads like Du Mez promulgate a version of Christianity that is more aligned with the latest progressive political trends and Pagan sacrificial rituals than with anything resembling orthodox, biblical Christianity. By framing authentic biblical faith as fanatical, their goal is to sideline it, confining it to the periphery where it can be more readily negated, ridiculed, and ultimately criminalized.

The crux of the matter is this—the crusade to brand and subsequently legislate against “Christian Nationalism” is less about safeguarding democratic principles and more about expunging the biblical underpinnings of our society. It revolves around the notion that the only acceptable expressions of faith are those that align with a progressive worldview. This represents not merely an objection to or an argument against conservative Christianity, but an active movement to obliterate its influence from the public domain.

To be clear, there are certainly elements of those who self-identify as “Christian Nationalists” who would be considered extreme and, at the very least, worthy of criticism and clarification. But the reality is that to the left, we’re all “Christian Nationalists” and we all better get used to the label if we believe that our faith should play any role at all in public policy.

Yet, such is the depth of misunderstanding regarding both Christianity and nationalism. For the conservative Christian, the ultimate loyalty lies with the Kingdom of God—a dominion that transcends all earthly nations and authorities. The Christian’s role in the public sphere is not to demand a theocratic state, but rather to champion a society that respects the sanctity of life, honors human dignity, and secures the liberty to worship God.

The ultimate ambition for certain progressives goes beyond silencing conservative Christian perspectives—it encompasses the total erasure of biblical Christianity from the nation’s collective conversation. The stakes of such an outcome are monumental. If the foundation of biblical veracity is dismantled, what recourse remains for the devout? Of course, God is sovereign and in control. But the response must be a resolute stand, a commitment to convey truth tempered with benevolence, and to engage with a spirit of conviction. Although earthly realms and rulers may wax and wane, the Scriptures and the truth that they hold will endure for all eternity.