Introduction
The Bhagavad-Gita is the most prominent of the Hindu sacred texts, and so it is not at all surprising that Kash Patel put his hand on a copy when he was sworn in as the newest director of the FBI. And I am really grateful that he did this because it gives us an opportunity to talk about some important stuff.
Kudos First
Now I have every reason to believe that Kash Patel is going to do some really good and necessary things at the FBI. That place is badly in need of some deep cleaning followed by two or three rounds of fumigation. All the indications are that Patel is going to oversee a process very much like that, and I believe that all of us should be encouraged and heartened as it all unfolds. And as he undertakes reforms at the FBI, my only hope is that bulldozers are involved at some point.
So what I am going to say here is not really so much a criticism of him as it is an opportunity to point out just how far away from Christian nationalism we actually are. This doesn’t mean that the secularists will stop freaking out about the CN threat—not to mention their media girlfriends with the pom poms. But as we don’t find ourselves nearly as scary as they do, this means that we at least should be able to think through this issue carefully.
What we are looking at now is a significant increase of Christian influence within a pagan operating system, for which we should be grateful. But that is a very different thing than any eschatological form of “Christian nationalism,” which is why we need to look carefully at what is actually happening now.
Believers Among the Unbelievers
There really is a structural issue that needs to be pointed out.
There is no problem with believers functioning and serving within the apparatus of a pagan empire. Think of Joseph in Egypt (Gen. 31:49), or of Daniel in Babylon (Dan. 2:48), or of Mordecai in Persia (Esther 10:3). Think of the exiles returning to Jerusalem, and their cooperation with Darius (Ezra 6:10-11). Think of Erastus, who was probably the treasurer for the city of Corinth (Rom. 16:23). Think of the friendship that Paul had with the Asiarchs in Ephesus (Acts 19:31). These were civic officials with certain cultic patriotic duties, and yet Paul was friends with them. So believers can be woven into a pagan or unbelieving system, and it is certainly possible for them to do so without compromise.
But there would be a problem if those believers someone came to believe that their mere presence within that system meant that the pagan empire was somehow automatically not really pagan anymore. It would be a problem if the Christians accommodated themselves to the de facto pluralism, and tried to turn it into a virtue. Principled pluralism is actually idolatry, while thriving under conditions of de facto pluralism is the strategy that has been assigned to us. We really are to seek the peace of the city (Jer. 29:7), and we are to do it like leaven in the loaf.
But, to change the metaphor, when the salt loses its saltiness, then it is good for nothing other than to be trampled upon by men (Matt. 5:13). And the way that salt loses its savor is by settling in, mistaking the journey for the destination.
So I rejoice that there will be many Christian believers serving throughout Trump’s administration. This is all to the good. But it is important for us (and for them) to understand what this means, and what it does not mean.
And incidents like Kash Patel’s swearing in provides a great help in furthering an understanding of what it does not and should not mean.
A Parable
One time the people who run Walmart decided that they should do something called Religion Awareness Week. During the course of this week, members of various religious traditions would get 20% off every purchase on their assigned day. On Monday, it would be for the Muslims. On Tuesday, Hindus. On Wednesday, the Jews would get the discount. On Thursday, it would be Christians, and Friday would be for the Buddhists. Saturday would be that catch-all category called Other. You know, Melanesian Frog Worshipers, Jains, Mormons, and Scientologists.
Now most Christians would be excited that “we got a day,” and would point to that as plain evidence of even-handedness, saying that Walmart was obviously dealing straight, trying to be objective, and seeking to be neutral. But this is truly myopic. There is a structure surrounding all of this, and the central question we should be asking is “what is the god of that structure?” There is a sponsoring entity, namely Walmart, and what is the god of that sponsoring entity? Who is the presiding deity over all the days? Who is the god of the system? Well, this is Walmart, so every day is Money Day. The god of the system here is Mammon.
So what am I trying to convey by means of my little Walmart parable?
Kash Patel is sworn in with his hand on the Bhagavad-Gita. In 2006, Keith Ellision was sworn in as a member of Congress using a copy of the Koran. J.D. Vance was sworn in with a copy of his family’s Kentucky Bible. Now if you look at that array, what happens when you zoom out? You should do so in order to look for the overarching structure. What structure holds them all together? What structure administers the oaths, and what god is being served there? The answer to that is the American system of civic governance, and it is one big enough and pluralistic enough to accommodate many gods, and many religious books.
Now a structure like this is making a claim. That claim has to do with sovereignty, hierarchy, and authority. The compromising tendency wants to point to this as an example of even-handedness, saying that no claim of superiority or inferiority is being made at all. The Koran, and the Bible, and the Gita, are all being treated equally. But there really is a hierarchical claim being made. The American pluralism on display here is claiming the authority to put the Bible on the same footing as the Koran.
The Most Needful Detachment
As shown earlier, it is lawful for a believer to be held or contained by a larger unbelieving structure. Paul in Rome, Joseph in Egypt, Esther in Persia, Daniel in Babylon, it’s all good. The thing that must not happen, however, is for the believers involved in such situations to start to smudge everything in their hearts and minds. Believers must never start to worship the containing structure.
When the containing structure seeks to flex, as it always will, then the response needs to be for Daniel to open his windows wide, and to pray to the God of Heaven the same way he always did (Dan. 6:10). So Christians who are asked to serve in this administration should certainly place their hand on the Bible and swear . . . in the name of the God of all gods, the Lord of all lords, the King of all kings, Jesus Christ our Lord. And this can be done with one word. “So help me, living God.” “So help me, true God.” “So help me Christ.”
This issue is precisely why the early Christians got in trouble with the Roman Empire. It was not because they worshiped Jesus . . . because the Romans could not have cared less if the Christians worshiped Jesus. The Rome of that day was a sink for every imaginable religious cult or mystery religion, and the attitude of Rome ran along the lines “knock yourself out.” Worship whatever you want.
The early Christians got into trouble with the state because of what and who they would not worship. They would not worship the structure that contained all these particular faiths. They flat refused to do that. All they had to do was include a pinch of incense for Caesar and for Rome, and it was a small pinch that for them represented total compromise.
Since we are talking about sacred books, we should consider the cultural container as the library. Now Christian nationalism will not be an actual thing until the library and the librarians are Christian. That end goal is not achieved if the Bible is merely resting upon one of the shelves. Neither has the goal been attained if the last three librarians were sworn in with a Bible . . . at least not if the next librarian could, if he so chose, be sworn in on a copy of the Humanist Manifesto.
If the library would allow for that, it is not being neutral toward all the faiths, but rather is claiming to be in charge of all the faiths.
So we are not in a position to make Kash Patel swear any differently than he did, and we most certainly shouldn’t try. But we should certainly swear differently.