NC home to key figures in renewed religious freedom debate 

There has been increased debate among conservative Protestants over whether, and in what sense, the United States should be considered a Christian country. Some, often identifying as Christian nationalists, argue America should function as a distinctly Christian nation with laws rooted explicitly in Christianity. Others, particularly Baptists, who have a long tradition of emphasizing religious liberty and limits on state power, argue the nation’s founders were correct to protect the free exercise of a wide range of religious beliefs. 

Many of the leading voices in that debate are based in North Carolina. 

In recent years, the discussion has intensified online and inside churches, particularly among Reformed and evangelical communities. At the center are figures like Stephen Wolfe, a North Carolina scholar and author of “The Case for Christian Nationalism;” and JD Greear, former president of the Southern Baptist Convention and pastor of The Summit Church in North Carolina. 

In an interview with Carolina Journal, Greear said that many conversations surrounding Christian nationalism fail to distinguish between recognizing Christianity’s historic influence on America and using government power to compel religious belief. 

Love WBT Charlotte's News Talk? Get more! Join the WBT Charlotte's News Talk Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Subscribe

We care about your data. See our privacy policy.

“One [misunderstanding] is that you believe that Christian nationalism is simply recognizing that our laws and our freedoms and our ideals are framed by a Christian worldview,” Greear said. “That is not Christian nationalism. That is just a recognition.” 

Greear said America’s founding ideals cannot be separated from Christianity’s influence on Western civilization. 

“This is a country that is based on Christian ideals, and you cannot separate those two,” he said. 

At the same time, Greear warned against movements that seek to use government authority to enforce Christianity itself. 

“The other side is where people then want the government to mandate essentially that people be Christians,” Greear said. 

Greear has consistently emphasized religious liberty, arguing that while many American laws, freedoms, and ideals have a Christian foundation, Baptist theology has historically rejected the idea that government should compel worship or enforce religious belief. 

“We just never looked at the government to compel worship or to mandate adherence to a Christian conscience,” Greear said. “Typically you use words like religious liberty and freedom of conscience as areas that government should stay out of.” 

At the same time, Greear stressed that Christians should remain active in politics and civic life. 

“Christians should be evangelizing the heck out of everybody,” he said. “And they should also be bringing their Christian worldview into the voting booth and the public square to shape our society according to the ideals of the Creator.” 

Greear also distinguished between the role of individual Christians and pastors themselves, arguing that pastors should avoid presenting personal political preferences as equivalent to biblical teaching. 

“The church’s authority is rooted in the Bible and the gospel,” Greear said. 

He added that while pastors can speak clearly on issues Scripture directly addresses, they should avoid turning disputed political issues into doctrinal positions. 

“I have an opinion on global warming,” Greear said. “I think my opinion is the correct one, otherwise I wouldn’t hold it. But I refuse to make JD Greear’s position on global warming part of our pulpit.” 

Greear acknowledged concerns that some rhetoric associated with Christian nationalism is beginning to cross historical Baptist boundaries regarding religious liberty and government power. 

“There’s a danger right now of people trying to say that the US government is the extension of God’s kingdom,” Greear added. “It is not. It is a temporary, secular government that has limits.” 

Those in the Christian nationalist movement offer a far different understanding of Christianity’s relationship to government. 

In his 2022 book, “The Case for Christian Nationalism,” Wolfe describes Christian nationalism as “a totality of national action, consisting of civil laws and social customs, conducted by a Christian nation as a Christian nation, in order to procure for itself both earthly and heavenly good in Christ.” 

His vision includes policies such as restricting Sabbath commerce and punishing public blasphemy. Wolfe’s book is considered a foundational text for understanding the contemporary Christian nationalist movement. 

When Carolina Journal reached out for comment, Wolfe responded with conditions for an interview, including requests to be referred to as “Dr. Wolfe” and as an expert on Christian nationalism. He also required that the reporter refer to John Locke as a Christian nationalist.

CJ decided not to pursue an interview under these conditions, as CJ’s publisher, the John Locke Foundation, holds that a major part of their namesake’s legacy — as seen in works like “The Second Treatise” — was in helping develop the intellectual foundations for religious liberty and freedom of conscience. Also, AP Style directs only to use “Dr.” before a name when referring to a medical doctor, not a PhD.

CJ reached out to Wolfe in March after his friend, North Carolina pastor and fellow Christian nationalist leader Michael Spangler posted on X, “We need a Protestant Hitler.” In additional posts, Spangler described the phrase as a call for “ruthless anti-Judaism and anti-leftism.” 

Spangler, based in the Winston-Salem area, is associated with a house church network and pastors a congregation known as Piedmont Presbyterian. Wolfe, who had maintained a years-long personal relationship with Spangler, publicly distanced himself from the comments, calling them a “turning point.” 

“I have no interest in retrieving Nazism, nor do I want a ‘Protestant Hitler,’” Wolfe wrote. 

The dispute exposed growing divisions within a movement often grouped together under the broad label of Christian nationalism. 

“There are movements that are populist, that are identitarian… and it began to grow in our circles here,” said Eli McGowan, a Presbyterian Christian who has tracked the movement and its influence online. “Unfortunately… there was a racist element to much of this movement.” 

McGowan said many of the debates that began online are increasingly creating real-world consequences inside churches and denominations. 

“We’re enough years into this phenomenon… that churches have split,” he said. 

Much of the movement’s growth has occurred online, where anonymous accounts and algorithm-driven content often amplify increasingly extreme rhetoric. 

“Online is where they feel free… to fully commit to their ideas,” McGowan said. 

Greear has also become a target of criticism from figures aligned with Christian nationalist ideas. 

In February, Greear criticized social media posts from President Donald Trump, writing that the images were “deeply offensive” and emphasizing that “each of us is made in the image of God.” 

His comments drew backlash online from William Wolfe, executive director of the Center for Baptist Leadership and a former Trump administration official, a friend but not relative of Stephen Wolfe. 

“Doesn’t seem great that a pastor is logging onto X… on Sunday morning to spread woke lies about Donald Trump before getting in the pulpit to preach,” Wolfe wrote. 

In another post, William Wolfe added, “JD Greear is uniquely responsible for the left-wing infiltration of the SBC for the last decade.” 

While much of the debate has centered around Protestant circles, similar conversations are also emerging among some Catholic-aligned movements, including “integralists,” who advocate for a more explicitly Christian state. 

At the same time, many denominations remain resistant to Christian nationalist ideas. McGowan pointed to Pentecostal and charismatic churches as generally less influenced by the movement, partly because of theological differences and stronger support for Israel. 

Although the debate is national in scope, North Carolina has become an unexpected focal point, with figures like Greear, Wolfe, and Spangler reflecting an ongoing divide within American conservatism over the role religion should play in public life.

“NC home to key figures in renewed religious freedom debate ” was originally published on www.carolinajournal.com.