Introduction
While upholding the positive role of religions in civic society, this statement on Religious Nationalism addresses the dangerous conflation of religious belief and violent or exclusionary nationalism which continues to beleaguer and undermine many societies. Religious leaders and religious communities can and do relate in positive ways with the countries or nation-states in which they are found. Religious commitment can inspire governmental and political leaders to pay attention to the welfare of ordinary people and, in many cases, the well-being of the planet on which we all live. The effect is a more wholesome community for all. Such positive relationships of the religious and the political are affirmed by the National Council of Churches.
However, the misuse of religious traditions to exclude or harm whole segments of populations damages societies and obscures the positive contribution of religion. Religious Nationalism is here understood as any merging of a religious tradition, political outlook, and national loyalty that brings harm to those with different religious commitments. By privileging one religious community and discriminating against others, Religious Nationalism can lead to the unjust oppression of those within different religious communities and even incite violence against them. The victims are most often those of other religious traditions or ethnicities who are portrayed as not truly belonging and ineligible for the full benefits of that society. The resulting harm can include marginalization, exclusion from public or community services, harassment, or persecution.
The National Council of Churches calls upon our Christian colleagues in the United States and around the world to join with us in opposing such abuses. The Council also seeks partners in other religious traditions with whom we can explore and address these behaviors, whether they are fueled by Christian Nationalism or by other forms of Religious Nationalism. And we stand in solidarity with our ecumenical and inter-religious partners who, as much as may be possible in their particular settings, already challenge Religious Nationalism: whether in self-criticism or out of concern for the wellbeing of religious minorities anywhere in the world.
Religious Nationalism around the World
In 2021, the National Council of Churches turned its attention to Religious Nationalism by focusing first on Christian Nationalism in the United States, describing it as both a misuse
of state power and a distortion of Christianity.1 In the United States, Christian Nationalism has provided the foundation for rewriting history, to the near exclusion of religious diversity and the experience of Asian, Black, Indigenous, Latino, Pacific Islander and other peoples. As a result, it has enabled discrimination and sanctioned violence. Nor is Christian Nationalism limited to the U.S., because transnational ramifications are part of the legacy of western colonialism.
In other contexts, differing forms of Religious Nationalism produce similar outcomes, including persecution and violence against religious minorities. Examples include Sinhalese Buddhist Nationalism in Sri Lanka, the Hindutva movement in India, exclusivist manifestations of Jewish Zionism in Israel, Salafi movements in various Muslim countries, and various forms of Christian Nationalism in Russia, Brazil, and elsewhere. We in the National Council of Churches oppose all forms of Religious Nationalism that bring harm to others, firm in our belief that every religious tradition is called to move its adherents toward greater respect and care for all.
In view of the injustices fueled by Religious Nationalism, the National Council of Churches seeks common cause with those in the U.S. and other countries who believe religious adherents are called to work together for a better, more humane world. Precisely because our religious traditions span national boundaries, the problems spawned by Religious Nationalism do as well. But for the same reason, conversation and joint efforts in this country can have benefits elsewhere. More than ever, we are globally connected.
We believe that, in conversation and collaboration with committed partners, we can and will be more effective at countering the negative consequences of this misguided ideology, in whatever form it takes.
The purpose of this policy statement of the National Council of Churches is therefore two- fold: first, to make clear our rejection of all forms of Religious Nationalism that give rise to harm; and second, to invite into conversation, mutual learning, and collaboration those partners—ecumenical, interfaith, and community-based—who are willing to address these concerns with us. To repeat, we do not include in “Religious Nationalism” the religious values and principles that positively inform civic life and are largely shared across cultures. These can bring benefits to an entire nation and its people through a healthy complementarity between religion and politics. We do seek, however, to name the problem of Religious Nationalism (to which America and American Christians have contributed) and we seek partnerships in addressing it. Toward these ends, this statement is but a beginning.
With this in mind, we in the Council offer the following as starting points:
1. The problem of Religious Nationalism must be acknowledged, working within our various religious traditions and seeking partners across them.
This means addressing the question of what constitutes a constructive voice in the political arena and how that voice is to be maintained—especially in the face of the deadly combination of religious zealotry and state power which has fostered hostility, cruelty, and oppression. We acknowledge that there will not be complete unanimity on what constitutes prosocial values and practices in our religious traditions. Nevertheless, we believe there is much to be found in common among our religious traditions that will provide a basis for collaborative speech and action.
2. Addressing Religious Nationalism requires careful discernment and cultural sensitivity.
In addressing Religious Nationalism, the determination of what constitutes prosocial versus antisocial behavior requires ongoing discernment and cross-cultural sensitivity. As stated above, the National Council of Churches affirms religious and political commitments that bring benefits to an entire nation and its people. Further, the Council recognizes that the distinctiveness and relationship of religion and politics are understood differently in the various traditions of the world. We in the United States need to acknowledge that our conceptual frameworks may or may not be helpful to others. The Council therefore invites conversation regarding these concepts as part of the inter-religious work needed to identify and address the harms of Religious Nationalism in their diverse contextual settings.
3. We who share this vision seek to draw on the best of our religious traditions, working for the common good in mutually reinforcing ways.
Drawing on the best of our religious traditions, we who share this vision seek to work across religious and state boundaries to build healthy communities that respect and uphold the dignity of all. Christians are called to care for our neighbors, safeguard the well-being of strangers, and build reconciled communities. Similar principles can be found in other religious traditions. Religious people may accordingly unite in advocating for the just treatment of those who are not like themselves, whether racially, sexually, religiously, or nationally. They may also strategize about ways to avoid exploitative and violent problems resulting from an inappropriate conflation of religious and national loyalties.
4. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a helpful guide.
A guide we in the Council find useful for assessing particular expressions of Religious Nationalism is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Accepted by the United Nations in 1948, the UDHR espouses the principle that religions must not be used to constrain the human rights of any person. Article 18 of the UDHR specifically affirms, as in its title, the “Freedom of Religion or Belief”. The more recent Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief, adopted by the United Nations in 1981, expands on this concern. Article 2.1 says, “No one shall be subject to discrimination by any State, institution, group of persons, or person on the grounds of religion or other belief.” An appraisal of the role of Religious Nationalism in the context of a particular country requires examining how religious beliefs and practices may be functioning as cover or encouragement for the dehumanization of those seen as non-adherents. Because the UDHR speaks to our common humanity without being grounded in any particular religion, each tradition may need to look for internal grounding of similar tenets. But precisely because the UDHR and the 1981 Declaration have sought to affirm universal principles, we find in them a framework and language for engaging across traditions.
5. Religious and political leaders need to be challenged on the issue of Religious Nationalism.
Religious and political leaders across the globe are faced with a moral decision: whether to use their voices for equality, justice, and human dignity, or allow their voices to be co- opted and superseded in the deployment of religion as a cultural identity-marker to the exclusion and oppression of others. The ethics of accountability and redress are important topics for conversation among partners across different religious traditions.
The National Council of Churches, as representatives of one of the world’s largest religious communities in one of the world’s most influential states, calls upon all Christians in the U.S. first to seek, with courage and humility, an understanding of these issues, and then to explore and promote strategies in their own churches and communities that better represent the nature and teachings of Jesus Christ. At the same time, we in the Council invite conversation and collaboration with our interfaith partners and others, for it is mostly in demonstrating and enlarging the capacity for interreligious cooperation and finding common principles, imperatives, and solutions that we will model what we seek.
All human beings share this one world. Drawing on the best of our traditions, let us together work toward a more humane world.
Adopted October 18, 2024
1 See the NCC policy statement on “The Dangers of Christian Nationalism in the United States” (2021).