What passes for Christian civil philosophy and political government philosophy is shifting
: Jenna Ellis in the morning on American Family Radio.
Jenna Ellis: I love talking about the things of God because of truth and the biblical worldview. The U.S. constitution obligates our government to preserve and protect the rights that our founders recognize come from God our creator, not our government. I believe that scripture in the Bible is very clear that God is the one that raised up each of you, and God has allowed us to be brought here to this specific moment in time.
: This is Jenna Ellis in the morning.
Jenna Ellis: Good morning. And I am really excited for this show today, this conversation, in this deep dive discussion. So buckle up, because occasionally there are topics that, you know, we can't just do a 15 minute segment on and kind of hit the highlights. We have to do a deeper dive because you really need to understand not just where we are, but how we got here. And the ideology that purports, potentially to be Christian, but really is a wolf in sheep's clothing. And I say that tongue in cheek because there are literally two men named wolf, that are the wolves in sheep's clothing, in this particular, arena. And of course, I'm talking not just about the, Israel first, you know, kind of America only divide, you know, some of the, podcast wars of The Tucker Carlsen MTGs, you know, and some of those, the Candace Owens, you know, the conspiracy theorists on the right, and some of all of these, you know, kind of, battles that are going on in the gop. But even more fundamentally than that, what passes for Christian civil philosophy and political government philosophy founded on a biblical worldview is shifting. If you aren't paying attention. And I don't want our AFR audience and our AFR family to get caught up in this trap because of the vagary surrounding all of these terms or because some people are going, well, don't, don't worry about that. And you know, of course we want to have a Christian nation. So therefore they start advocating for things, saying they're not advocating for theocracy, but they really are. And the, and the purpose is to be a post constitutionalist society. So where we are right now. And then we're going to kind of journey back and say, you know, how we got here, we with my special guest this, morning.
William Wolfe: Mike o' Fallon and James Lindsay oppose Christian morality in politics
But where we're at today, William Wolfe, if you don't know him, he's, kind of risen up the ranks in the sbc, the Southern Baptist Convention, in my opinion, unfortunately, I know William Wolf personally. I got to know him through Liberty University and the Freedom center there. but he was a former Trump administration official in the first term. And he has really kind of been this wolf in sheep's clothing to advocate for, for integralism and for an overhaul of the U.S. constitution and basically advocating for a theocracy under the guise of, well, this is what Christians have been saying all along, and this is what our founders actually intended. And it's utterly, completely false. So he posted, this week, a post against my, friends, Mike o' Fallon and James Lindsay, suggesting, and this is a false interpretation of their position. It's a total straw man. But he said this. It's been a long time coming, but I'm glad to see Micah o' Fallon and James Lindsay officially come out against Christian morality in American politics tonight. They both said they oppose Christians advancing a biblically grounded moral vision of law and politics. Masks off. I responded to that and said this is not a fair statement of their position. They, Mike o' Fallon and James Lindsay, are against integralism, theocracy and Christian nationalism. Slash a post constitutional order where the church is the government. And I am against that too. So Mike o' Fallon is joining me now. He is the founder of sovereign nations. very sincere Christian. I know that some in our audience who are listening are a little hesitant about James Lindsay, who I think is spot on on this, because he is a, ah, an avowed, agnostic. And we're working on that. You know, trust me, Mike and I've been working on that for years. But he's right about these things. But Mike is a very sincere, ah, Christian. He shares the same biblical values, that we do here. And so we'll kind of put James aside for, for a moment so that you don't get distracted by that.
Christian nationalism argues that church should have control over state government
And Mike, you know, I want to talk about, you know, where we're at right now in this position because I think that we're, regardless of all of these other debates that maga, the far right, the gop, the establishment, the Catholics versus the evangelicals. I mean, all of those things kind of aside, a fundamental definition of what we mean by a Christian nation is really what's at issue here.
Mike o' Fallon: Yes. And I think understanding that if you were looking for a tool to deconstruct or to Balkanize what we would know as the United States today, this is the way that you would do it. You do it through integralism or neo integralism or what calls itself Christian nationalism, which is really integralism with Protestant characteristics. So it's the same thing where you have this tradition of political thought that argues That a temporal authority like the state or the state government should be subordinated to spiritual authority, the church, to promote the common good. So when you're saying common good, what is the common good? And the common good of course can be a movable object depending on what's actually happening with the church. So we would say today, especially in the post Vatican II era, that the Roman Catholic Church's beliefs and doctrines differ greatly from what they would have actually been within the 15th or 16th century. And as well we would say within our Baptist traditions or within our Presbyterian positions, although we've split and split and split and the denominations have become such a plethora of different beliefs, it's just incredible. But you would see that within those beliefs as well, we've come someplace to somewhere with the idea of that we are always reforming, of course. And Jen and I would both believe that. I think we're both basically reformed Baptists, kind of more in the MacArthurite kind of, position, if you would. But we would see then a threat of someone saying, you know what, that establishment clause in the First Amendment, just forget about that. What we need to do is we need to develop a state church. Well then the question obviously comes of who's going to be in charge of that? Who is in charge of your state church? Or is it another three letter agency? That just depends on who's occupying the White House at the time. And if that's the case, then if you can come in on the right, what happens when it comes in in the left? Well, also, what is actually going to be the doctrinal distinctives of that? And if you're saying that the church needs to have control of that? Well, how many denominations do we have in the Protestant tradition? How many different beliefs do you have within the Catholic position? What about the orthodox and their whole concepts that they have that come along with them as well? Well, where actually does this go? And if you actually take a look at the people that are sitting at the top of, let's say the Southern Baptist Convention or of the Roman Catholic Church or of the Orthodox, you know, they have the Greene patriarch, all of those people have basically progressive views. And integralism in this sense isn't necessarily a rightist view because it was mainly popularized, recently under the leftist side of things. and then after Adrian Vermeule of course converted, I think that was in 2016, and then you had Saurabh Amari as well declare, himself an integralist. And this whole new crowd of integralists began to take Over a good portion of what we call itself conservatism is that along with that you would have this kind of a root start to grow up within what was the anti woke side of the Southern Baptist Convention or the Presbyterian side or whatever the case may be. And that's where we started running into some real problems.
Jenna Ellis: M. Yeah. And you know it's, it's such a fascinating kind of twisting of the founding and of you know, the frame you mentioned, the establishment clause and the relationship between the church and the state. And obviously in a post truth, pluralistic society, like what the left would suggest, America is and should be and always has been to say, you know, diversity is our strength and because we have the establishment clause, then you know, the founders always intended to have a secular state. You know, all of those things are false. But the way that we respond to that is not saying, well the church and the government should be one and we need to bring back blasphemy laws and we need to bring back the patriarchy and overturn the 19th amendment so that women are barefoot in the kitchen at home. Can't vote. because if you look at the statistics it's you know, the the single, ah, 40 year old cat ladies who you know, tend to vote liberal. And so, you know, this is our key to unlocking the American utopia of the Christian nationalist vision. I mean that's not the correct answer, but that's what these Christian nationalists are actually selling. And they're doing it in a way, Mike, that is so intentionally vague. And then they're setting up these straw man arguments like what William Wolf is doing, suggesting that because people like you and I don't buy into their version of this utopian theocracy, that somehow we're advocating against biblical morality in government. And that couldn't be further from the truth.
Mike o' Fallon: Right. And I think if we take a look at really what the situation is, is that let's say that we lose, you know, the establishment clause, let's say that we have a state church, well now all of a sudden you and I are under the authority of that state church. What if it's a doctrine where, if it's pushing doctrines that we don't actually believe in. Well what happens at that point? Well that means that all of a sudden our cognitive liberty, our ability to believe what we believe because our consciences are seared, let's say in our case, to the word of God, well now we must violate that conscience or else we are actually standing against the state. So what happens at that point are we looking at then starting to have, you know, executions and so forth for people that don't believe the right things? Because the eternal destiny of man is so much more important than the temporal meaning that if you're like a thief and you steal something or whatever you do get, you get the stocks and you get whipped and whatever the case may be, but if you are someone who's violating the eternal end of man, that that is something that you should pay with your life. So if we're actually starting to suggest that that's a better scheme of things, and you hear this from people that are associated with some of the organizations that William is a part of, William Wolf, that is. But you also see people that are within those organizations, like Eryn Wren, basically suggesting that we need to use postmodernism and critical theory within our understanding of the Church in the Bible. And now we're just back to where we were just seven years ago. So what this is, is not really a different thing than what happened on the woke left side of things. Because the woke left movement within Protestantism and within Catholicism and within Orthodoxy was actually more of an intergalist movement. So you would have a document that came out, and was, it was an encyclical, I think it was 2016 or 2015, coming along the same debut of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals of the United nations that were as well adopted by the World Economic Forum. It was called Laudato Si. And Laudato Si was the document that came out from the Roman Catholic Church that basically agreed with all of the principles that were there and the Goals of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations. And that in essence is where you're looking at things like social justice. Social justice is an integralist concept. That's part of the whole deal. The idea of an economic system that is not capitalism and it's not completely communism, but it's distributism. That's a concept from integralism. So when we take a look back at some of the early encyclicals of the Catholic Church that actually define what integralism is and how it works, you would look at, Quanta cur, I believe it was. I think that was the first one. That's Pope Pius IX and then Immortale dei, that was from Pope Leo xiii. And if you recall, Jenna, you and I were talking about this about a year ago at a meeting we were both at. And I was saying, well, what's the thing with Pope Leo xiv. Why is he Pope Leo xiv? Because he's going to continue the mission of Pope Leo xiii. So now we're going to have a transition, or they're hoping to have a transition into interdalism as, our governing system that we would have. And that doesn't matter if it's on the left or the right. It's still saying that those that are the faith leaders will be the ones that determine what happens in the temporal sense of governance.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, and this is such a dangerous ideology. And this is exactly what the founders, you know, coming them, the Church of England and that split with, with the Catholic Church and what they saw when there was a gospel or even a false gospel that was attempted to be advanced by force and coercion, what they envisioned for religious liberty was not suggesting that morality itself is divorced from government, but that the church and those who are in the ecclesia and who run the church are not over the jurisdiction of the civil government in any sense of a theocracy. And so what is really, important to understand about this particular debate is that when we see some of the dominant kind of integralist and frankly pluralistic secularist, rhetoric and arguments coming from the left, it's very easy for Christians to recognize that and to dismiss it because it's coming from the left. But when arguments like this are advanced from people who we've already kind of accepted into our own camp, like people who are part of the SBC and their pastors and, you know, they're they're conservative commentators, you know, maybe, that is where discernment is incredibly necessary and very valuable because right now on the right, and this is where Ben Shapiro in his speech at Heritage in December was so spot on when he was saying we can't just listen to anyone who calls themselves a conservative, just like we in the Kingdomnomics of God know that we can't listen to just anyone who calls themselves a Christian. And so where do we need to be more focused in recognizing kind of not only the false gospel that this is presenting this viewpoint, but the ultimately the false view of a biblical form of civil government as well?
Mike o' Fallon: Yeah, I think anytime that someone says that we need to form, ah, another government, or that maybe we can say that the floor joints have basically rotted out from the United States and we need to replace those with a new foundation, a new founding, once someone starts suggesting that that's actually what we need in the end is to get rid of our Constitution.
Mike Fallon: The American project actually had its source from Scotland
Look, look where it's gotten us today. You could say the same thing if you wanted to about the Bible then, because there's all sorts of progressive concepts and really bad ideas from people who claim to be Christians as well as people that claim to be Americans or people that believe that they should be, in governmental positions within the United States that have really bad ideas. So there's nothing wrong with gatekeeping, in my understanding, of things, of people that are not along with the American project. And that American project actually had its source from Scotland. And if you think about the killing times in Scotland that occurred, this is after basically the Church of England had already been the official church of the entire United Kingdomnomics. Is, of course, they had possession to some extent of Scotland. Is that then because the Scottish were refusing to follow the edicts of the king and they said, no, we will not do that. This is what our faith is. Well, then you had to pay with your life. So in many ways, the American experiment is basically the Scottish Revolution happening in what we would call North America and saying that, no, what we need to do is we need to make sure that we don't have a church that is over the state and that we need to have cognitive liberty. Let's say that, that, you know, whomever it is that takes control of this new institution that they want to put in place believes in pedo baptism. Well, I don't believe in pedo baptism. I don't believe Jenna does either. We believe in baptism after confession, but what if that's just not the law of the land anymore? Then we just have to follow it so our conscience no longer matters and our, our choice in terms of what we believe to be true then disappears.
Jenna Ellis: Wow. Well, we're going to take a break right here, but Mike, o' Fallon is going to continue this conversation, with me. He's the founder of sovereign nations when we come back after the break. This is such an important discussion because we have to know as Christians what the Bible teaches about God's authority, what it teaches about the different and separate jurisdictions of the civil government, the church government and the family. And then how we advocate for biblical morality within the confines of ordered liberty that God himself requires. Not just, you know, the founders, because they're our founders. I mean, they can get things wrong and they had. And we can debate that, but we can't ultimately debate what God himself has proclaimed as truth. So we will be right back with more.
Jenna Ellis: Christian nationalists would like to bring back coerced Christian beliefs
: welcome back to Jenna Ellis in the Morning on American Family Radio.
Jenna Ellis: Welcome back. And I'm here with my special guest for this Program Mike o', Fallon, who is the founder of Sovereign nations, and, they provide some really, really great resources on this topic. We're talking about the legitimate form of civil government under God's ordered liberty and what that means for morality in government, what that means for the separate jurisdictions of the civil government, the church government and the family government. What that means for the ongoing conversation of Christian nationalists who would like to bring back, coerced Christian beliefs and actions rather than actually have religious freedom in the sense of that the founders contended and in fact enshrined in our US Constitution and what their actual aim is, which is basically, you know, Mike, going all the way back to Constantine. Right? I mean, when you had, when you had someone who's a Roman emperor suggesting that it was now against the law to not be a Christian, how did that affect society? Well, then you just got a bunch of fake Christians who, who are professing to be Christians just to abide by the law and not be punished. But you didn't have any actual conversion. I mean, there were some, of course, through the real Church, but you. But it just was yet another example in world history about how the Church's calling is not to be coercive through seizing power, but to a legitimate government to allow the Church and to provide the forum of freedom and the liberty that the Church then can go and proselytize a dying culture. Because that's what the Church is called to do is to proclaim the truth, not to seize power. And can Christians be in government? Absolutely. And they should. And we should select and prefer Christians as our leaders, but those leaders should not be the same as the Church leaders. Otherwise what? The history of the Church and the state has reminded us that, as you posted in a response to William Wolfe, it reminds us that when theological truth becomes entangled with coercive authority, the result is often a dilution of both.
Mike o' Fallon: That's correct. Now, if you think back, we don't have to go back into the 18th century or the 19th century or even go back to the 4th century to think of where integralism as a system was used in some sense. and that would be going back to France. And if we think of the collapse of the Third Republic in 1940 and when the Third Reich took over France, what they turned to was this concept of a national, religious, traditional move. And it was what you would see in Vichy France. And so this idea of it being the true France and this national revolution that takes place. Liberty, ah, equality, fraternity, and so forth. and then the elimination of, the secular, you know, in Republican ideologies. It did have as well, a very antisemitic pillar to it, if you will. So this antisemitism was also important in shipping out the Jewish population to internment camps in Germany and other places within Eastern Europe. So this was a awful thing that happened within the scope of World War II. And so that wasn't that long ago. So when people start talking about the Post World War II liberal consensus, this is one of the things that they definitely didn't want to have happen again. and those were good things. That's a good thing. You didn't want to have a Nazi or a Vichy France kind of situation where you would have the church participating in hunting, down those that are not of the same faith, that are not truly French, if you will, and making sure that, they're sent away to camps. But a lot of things like that are even being suggested now. And we can see kind of like in the development or the evolution, I think, of someone like Joel Webbin, and I think, Jenna, you might remember, you know, back just four or five years ago, Joel Webin was a very reasonable, good apologist that was. That had his podcast and did a good show and very complimentary of myself and James Lindsay. But then all of a sudden, after this thing started to grow up that you and I both saw in 2022 and 2023, that kind of came from this new founding, an American reformer kind of generated this, this bitter root that was within the especially reform circles. Then you saw the same thing happening. And I'm sorry if I have to say this name, but General Flynn, within the larger scope of charismatic and large church movements that are not necessarily part of the Southern Baptist Convention of the pca, more of a popularized non reformed version of this, is that you saw this idea where he would say in front of crowds, we need to have one nation with one God and one religion. Well, who's in charge of saying what that is? Or do we have a majority vote? Well, the only way that you can actually achieve that is if you Balkanize the nation. If you come in and you basically say, you know what we need to have? We have a national divorce. But that national divorce needs to happen 60 happen in 60 different kinds of identity groups. Need by, divide them by race, need to divide them by sexual preference, need to divide them by religion. And if you're going in that kind of direction, well, then you're going to get Basically your technocratic 15 minute cities that we said we were so afraid of when the leftists were saying that that's what they wanted to do. But now we're going to bring it
Jenna Ellis: in on the right m. And you know, it's almost playing into the left's, intentional game, their theory that they've gamed out, which is to say, okay, well, fine, you know, you guys on in the red states can, you know, try to, outlaw abortion, you know, put up your, all of your moral laws and whatever, as long as the blue states are allowed to do whatever they want to do. And you know, this kind of national divorce that ultimately, according to the left, it never is, okay, we're going to just divorce and then leave you alone. It's that once, then they get the foothold of. All right, it is now reasonable and it's predictable and it's acceptable for us to have all of our laws according to the political theories that we prefer. Then we're going to go and challenge your red state laws in the Supreme Court and under our system of an oligarchy of, you know, the nine rogue justices, we're going to actually force our view of things on you. Because it's never a divorce that actually works. It's just like the separation of church and state. And even, you know, alluding Back to John MacArthur. I mean, he even changed his mind on this. And I did an interview with him after I represented him against Gavin Newsom and the state, encroaching into his own church and telling them that they had to shut down during the whole Covid narrative. He actually changed his position and said that he did in that interview with me, that listeners can go back and then listen to. I mean, it was on our airwaves here as well, saying, you know, no, if we just retreat into our churches and we don't advocate for laws that are built on objective moral truth, then eventually we get to a left dominated society. So the question though, Mike, is we all know this. It's so patently obvious from history and from all of the times that, you know, we've tried all of this from, you know, the Balkanizing of, you know, of Europe and you know, all of these places where, you know, it's been, fragmented and you know, empires have fallen and split and we could go through that world history. So are people right now like the Joel Webbins, the William Wolf's, the Stephen Wolfs? Do they just not know this? And, and do you think that they're sincerely advocating for this. Like, maybe AOC is sincerely advocating for. For, you know, democratic socialism because she thinks that her way has never been tried and it'll work. Or are they actual infiltrators on the right because they know what they're doing and they just want to seize power?
Mike o' Fallon: Well, I think you remember back to. I think the guy's name was Mr. Reagan, I think was his handle that did the whole piece on aoc. And what he was exposing at the time is that AOC wasn't necessarily like a firebrand, you know, like, really dedicated progressive that came up and just wanted to run for office. You know, kind, of grassroots. No, she was an actress who answered a casting call for someone to run for that position within the House of Representatives. And much like that, I think what we have are a lot of actors. I, think that this probably irritated, Mr. Wolf quite a bit. But I basically said that Kari Pray Jean Bowler, who is the. Now, I think she's been a Catholic for 10 months, the woman who got, kicked off of the Religious Liberty Commission, after her outrage and so forth of, Zionism, et cetera, et cetera. And there was, like, three other Catholics on the panel. And now she's trying to, she's trying to claim that it's because she was, she was Catholic, that she was kicked off. No, it's because you were out of control and you couldn't discuss things in a. In a civil manner. Well, now she's, of course, immediately she goes on Tucker Carlsen. She's blown up. And you know her. She's increased her following by 200,000 or whatever the case may be on Twitter. And I suggested that William Wolf basically is the Southern Baptist version of Kari preaching. Bowler, you know, is that you have somebody that comes from nowhere. He was first an intern at, Capitol Hill Baptist Church under Mark Dever in 2021, and then became an intern under Al Mueller in 2021 and 2022. And then immediately he's catapulted to success by basically shouting down, other people with confidence, bias and so forth, and is getting all these opportunities to be on all these shows when the guy. No one had ever heard of him before, outside of the fact that he had served in the Trump administration for a couple of years. I believe it is a Defense Department or the State Department. But if it was in the Defense Department, that was under Mark Esperance, who was as woke as the day is long. So there's something that's going on here.
George Floyd: Christian nationalism is meant to split and divide America
And I think the question I would ask the audience to think about is, well, what happens? What happens, let's say if. If all of a sudden we are Balkanized, let's say that we do shatter our nation into bits. And you have to live in your small Christian nation or your small Christian, feudalistic society that's somewhere between Kentucky and Tennessee or whatever, because you can't. You can have your own truth there as opposed to someplace else that has their black liberation truth or someone else has their Islamic truth or whatever the case may be. What eventually happens to evangelism? How are you going to evangelize? Because evangelism is about going up to someone who does not have your beliefs and you're explaining to them this is the way, the truth and the life. This is the gospel. This is not just your path to salvation, but to a transformed life and a transformed mind, a renewing of your mind here on earth. you can't do that anymore. Because once you're in a place that is filled with people that don't believe the same thing you do, well, then that's going to be illegal. So this applies across the board. It's meant to shatter. It's not actually meant to bring the whole nation to a truth. It is meant to split and divide.
Jenna Ellis: M. And. And this is the danger, you know, of all of this. And, you know, shortly before we came on air, this morning, Mike, you were. You and I were talking about how, you know, this has been a message, you know, that you have been, trying to sound the alarm for years. And, you know, honestly, for listeners to know. I mean, and I was telling Mike this as well, but for, sovereign nations and the ministry that Mike o', Fallon, has. Has endeavored to provide to Christians, I don't. I wouldn't have known the. The truth and the full understanding of what the Christian nationalist movement is actually advocating for. And it. This became so clear to me, not just in my personal conversations, obviously, with. With Mike o' Fallon and James Lindsay and others, but also in a really important resource from sovereign Nations. And, for those of you this weekend, you know, if you have an hour or so, you know, I think is about all that. It is maybe a little longer than that. Go to Sovereign nations, go to their website, and there is a seminar by Bill Roach talking about the truth of what Christian nationalism is actually advocating for. I want you to watch that this weekend with your family. Send it to your pastor. People need to understand this, Mike, because what. What people Think the Christian nationalist movement. What I thought, honestly, I thought, well, I'm m. I'm a Christian and I'm, you know, I love my country and I'm a nationalist. So of course I'm a Christian nationalist. They don't understand what the movement of cn, you know, tm, what that's actually advocating for. And this is such an incredible important resource.
Mike o' Fallon: Well, thank you for that and, right back at you. But I would say I think it's important for people to understand that this is part of a dialectical move. And in that same conference that, Jenna is directing you to, I would suggest, listening to some of the presentations. I did a presentation on progressive integralism and what that really is, and understanding that this whole move of Christian nationalism, which is integralism as well, but not pointing back to the Catholic Church necessarily yet. but then this, this also, this move that it is dialectical political warfare. So you first had woke left. And our reaction to that, our reaction to Covid, our reaction to what they tried to do to all of society because of the precipitating, death of George Floyd. And that action then meant that we need to employ dei, we need to employ critical race theory into everything that we have. Well, this is the reaction mode to that. But in a sense it's doing the same thing. And it's saying, well, you see that it's actually us white people that are oppressed, it's Christians that are oppressed, et cetera, et cetera. So you're bringing that victimhood mentality, and you're creating eventually a movement that is filled with vengeance. It's filled with revenge. And there is no part of the gospel that has vengeance and revenge involved in it. Vengeance or revenge alone is. That's God. That's what God is able to do within the course of history. And he is fully sovereign.
Jenna Ellis: Amen. And amen. And so you can go to sovereignnations.com, that's sovereignnations.com and then just click on the video tab, and you'll see, you know, all of these resources right there. And, it is so important that Christians are educated in this, that we understand this more deeply. this isn't just an aspect of, governance and American politics or even world history. You know, this goes directly, Mike, to our basic theology as well. Because if we are taken in by, you know, these, these quote unquote Christians that are actually presenting a false gospel because they're suggesting that Christianity must be coercive, and they're arguing in A large part as well, for dominion theology, that, you know, that Christians just need to dominate and take over the world by force, and that that will then, usher in the second coming of Christ. I mean, these are things that are actual heresies that, you know, we have for a long time in the systematic theology that has been accepted by church fathers, by, you know, Evangelical Protestantism, as a whole, for centuries. You know, these are things that are very fundamental. And so this isn't just something that you can say, well, you know, yeah, they're Christians. Maybe they disagree on a few policy things here and there. We can, you know, kind of just let it go. No, this is incredibly essential.
Jenna Ellis: Christian nationalism is opposed to liberty itself
And so in just the last few minutes in this segment, what are a couple. I mean, how would. How would you characterize maybe a couple of the key distinctions of, the mainstream Christian nationalist movement so that people are actually aware of what it is that they are suggesting their version of American utopia looks like?
Mike o' Fallon: Well, first of all, I think you should point out that it is opposed to liberty. Now, they keep on using the word liberalism, but liberty itself. And so liberty in and of itself is something that we have in the United States. And it's a new project, if you will, like there's never been anywhere else in the world. And so people that are Christian nationalists, and integralists as well, they would basically criticize what you would call a constitutional republic that has a liberal democracy, that's involved in the governance, therefore, because of the fact that we are the ones that decide what laws, what rules, what amendments we want in our society. So they would say that they should be separated, politics should not be separated from religious truth. And believing that if you do this, it's going to lead to this kind of atomized individualism. And it's in that atomized individualism that you don't have the common good. So that's the first thing they're going to demand, that we need to have one religion. They're also going to say that we need to divide people from an understanding of heritage Americans. So they say that, look, people that are of European descent, we're the ones that really need to have dominion, over these things. And we need to have our own nation and we need to expel those that are even recent, arrivals that came through legally. like, for instance, my Abuela Nabuelo came from Cuba. my wife, her family immigrated from Hong Kong many years ago. Is that. No, we need to send those people back. We need to have A society that's not plural in that sense, that we need to have one culture, and it needs to be an Anglo culture. And they would also, you notice that these people are Machiavellian, and they don't mind lying about things in order to achieve their ends. They also have a tendency to do nothing but talk about the Jews in Israel, which is quite obvious, I think, to everybody now. And that is all part of a larger, you could almost say a Christian nationalist integralist, intersectionality. So you have people that are Cesareo, papists, fascists. You have people that are, somewhere like, within a monarchist framework, like Curtis Yarvin. You'd have people like Patrick Deneen, R.R. reno and so forth that as well have, with RR Rienow, he's retreated to Hungary and he's living there now. And he's a Catholic integralist that comes back to the United States all the time. So we need to be cautious of these things, and we need to just make sure that people are telling the truth, they're proclaiming the gospel and that as well, that they seek to keep our union together, our constitutional republic. And if they are opposed to those things, well, they're not part of the same project that you and I are.
Jenna Ellis: Amen to that. Well, we have to take one more break here, and then we will be back, here on Jenna Ellis in the Morning with my special guest, Mike o', Fallon, to wrap things up and continue to talk about this very dangerous ideology that has become known as Christian nationalism. We'll be right back.
Jenna Ellis: Christian nationalism seeks to undermine U.S. Constitution
: Welcome back to Jenna Ellis in the Morning on American Family Radio.
Jenna Ellis: Welcome back. And I'm here with my special guest, Mike o', Fallon, who's the founder of Sovereign Nations. And again, you can find those resources@sovereign nations.com I would encourage you to go and listen to those resources, especially on Integralism and also on, Christian Nationalism this, weekend. Don't delay. Make it a point and a priority to be educated in these areas. It is important to our thorough understanding of theology, which is the things of God and truth. And so, you know, as we're moving forward, in this mike, and we're kind of barreling toward 2028. And who's going to take over for, ah, Donald Trump when, you know, ultimately he's not going to be on the ballot in 2028. And as much as he might wish that he was or still kind of, you know, project that he isn't going to be on the ballot. And so, you know, the question then becomes, you know, why on earth would we, as Christians, as conservatives, advocate for a movement that is seeking intentionally to overhaul and undermine our U.S. constitution, which is what we, I mean, the entire conservative movement is defined by, is conserving truth, conserving our founding, conserving our American law and order and way of life.
Mike o' Fallon: Yeah. this is actually a project to disrupt and dismantle what we know is the United States of America. And would you say, Jenna, that a movement that is calling itself Christian, that's trying to get into every major denomination that is evangelical, reformed, et cetera, it's already growing within Catholicism, within orthodoxy, that seeks to displace, our Constitution and suggest, regime change or civil war or Balkanization. Would you say that that is almost like an act of treason?
Jenna Ellis: I mean. Yeah, by definition. Right. Because this, is where it's so surprising that anyone on the right, any conservative worth their salt, if they are in good faith arguing that they're a conservative, and obviously a Christian, would advocate for a theory that is by definition, and openly and publicly challenging the US Constitution and wanting to overhaul our entire system of government. I mean, when Nancy Pelosi and AOC and the left want to dismantle the Second Amendment, when they want to ignore the Constitution, when they want the rise of the Supreme Court oligarchy, you know, when they. When they're advocating for a systematic overhaul, we call them traitors. And yet when it comes from the right, just because it's labeled Christian and it's saying, hey, you know, we can force our morality onto everybody else, then we sit back and go, well, you know, I might like that, because then our people are in charge. Well, no, it has to be that we are a nation of laws, not a nation of kings. And ultimately, this is what the Christian nationalist movement is trying to dismantle, is our system of ordered liberty that has God as the divine lawgiver and we the people, just as those who are under his authority and. And who, by our consent, have our government structure the way that it is, they want to remove all that and institute kings of their own making, just like the left wants to do the same thing. And it's wrong and dangerous on both sides.
Mike o' Fallon: Right. So if you get to a point where everybody wants revolution, which is the goal. The goal is to basically say, you know, this whole American project, it was doomed from the start. you know, we need to go back, and you'll hear this quite often from a lot of people that are playing Christian nationalists, is they'll say that you Know when it was really right was, was before actually this whole revolution, this whole idea breaking from the king and from the church, that was wrong. We shouldn't have done that. you'll hear them start to say things like this, because the idea is you want to get rid of the revolution and then you also want to then go back and you want to say, well, I want to get rid of Westphalia and the Peace of Westphalia, which happened, you know, after the 30 years war, which then happened after the defenestration of Prague, which happened after the Peace of Augsburg, which happened after the Reformation. So the idea is you want to go back to this idea of whose realm, their religion, wherever your region is, you can have your religion. But over everything, of course, was the Holy Roman Empire. So think of that from a digital perspective now is you're looking for techno feudalism to where you break up America. You break up America from these ideas of states that have some degree of sovereignty under a federal system. And now you go to something where you create these micro feudalist societies that are overall basically ruled by a larger authority. But no longer can America be the main global hegemony. So now you're looking at replacing everything with bricks. And this is one of the reasons why you have all the Christian nationalists freaking out about what's actually happening in Iran right now. And the reason that they're freaking out about that is because in the end, one of the plans is the rise of China and brics as the main system and multipolarity, which is Alexander Dugin's idea. This is why they're all fans of Alexander Dugan, the Gnostic wizard. And then what you would have is the replacement of what was the American free capitalist, free market system with then a very authoritarian top down digital system in more or less a technocracy. But you can believe whatever you want to believe in your own little micro feudalist, you know, state that you have. That's the idea. So we get rid of the American project, we, we get rid of the concept where you and I are free and sovereign individuals to believe what we want to believe and do what we want to do. And you know that Jenna wants to have a podcast and a job and so forth because we're moving into a post work world. So you're creating a situation that would actually work in a post work world where no longer are you a free individual to earn and live your life as you see fit.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, and this is so scary. And one of the other things that you will hear as well from the advocates of Christian nationalism is that, you know, our Constitution just isn't working anymore. You know, it just doesn't have enough restraint on evil. It just doesn't have, you know, enough power to impose morality. It's just not working anymore because the Democrats or because, you know, X reason. And so this is an attempt to undermine and dismantle everything that conservatives have been championing for the last 250 years, since the founding. This is by definition, not constitutional conservatism, and it is by definition not Christianity as premised in biblical truth of ordered liberty, a government that is based on God's design. And so you cannot be a sincere Christian in terms of wanting to follow what God expressly says for the government and want the same things that these Christian nationalists want. I mean, that's really the bottom line. So. Closing thoughts Mike?
Mike o' Fallon: Well, I would hope that your audience would consider, really using discernment in terms of who they're supporting, what ideas they hear, when people are starting to say, you know, what we really need is we need to have, God back in, control of America through a church system that somehow supersedes or is above our governance system.
Jenna Ellis: think about the implications of that. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, think about the implications of that and why that hasn't worked throughout history. Go to sovereignnations.com Listen to those resources. Follow Mike O' Fallon on X. And as always, you can reach me and my team, Jenna fr dot net.
What passes for Christian civil philosophy and political government philosophy is shifting
: Jenna Ellis in the morning on American Family Radio.
Jenna Ellis: I love talking about the things of God because of truth and the biblical worldview. The U.S. constitution obligates our government to preserve and protect the rights that our founders recognize come from God our creator, not our government. I believe that scripture in the Bible is very clear that God is the one that raised up each of you, and God has allowed us to be brought here to this specific moment in time.
: This is Jenna Ellis in the morning.
Jenna Ellis: Good morning. And I am really excited for this show today, this conversation, in this deep dive discussion. So buckle up, because occasionally there are topics that, you know, we can't just do a 15 minute segment on and kind of hit the highlights. We have to do a deeper dive because you really need to understand not just where we are, but how we got here. And the ideology that purports, potentially to be Christian, but really is a wolf in sheep's clothing. And I say that tongue in cheek because there are literally two men named wolf, that are the wolves in sheep's clothing, in this particular, arena. And of course, I'm talking not just about the, Israel first, you know, kind of America only divide, you know, some of the, podcast wars of The Tucker Carlsen MTGs, you know, and some of those, the Candace Owens, you know, the conspiracy theorists on the right, and some of all of these, you know, kind of, battles that are going on in the gop. But even more fundamentally than that, what passes for Christian civil philosophy and political government philosophy founded on a biblical worldview is shifting. If you aren't paying attention. And I don't want our AFR audience and our AFR family to get caught up in this trap because of the vagary surrounding all of these terms or because some people are going, well, don't, don't worry about that. And you know, of course we want to have a Christian nation. So therefore they start advocating for things, saying they're not advocating for theocracy, but they really are. And the, and the purpose is to be a post constitutionalist society. So where we are right now. And then we're going to kind of journey back and say, you know, how we got here, we with my special guest this, morning.
William Wolfe: Mike o' Fallon and James Lindsay oppose Christian morality in politics
But where we're at today, William Wolfe, if you don't know him, he's, kind of risen up the ranks in the sbc, the Southern Baptist Convention, in my opinion, unfortunately, I know William Wolf personally. I got to know him through Liberty University and the Freedom center there. but he was a former Trump administration official in the first term. And he has really kind of been this wolf in sheep's clothing to advocate for, for integralism and for an overhaul of the U.S. constitution and basically advocating for a theocracy under the guise of, well, this is what Christians have been saying all along, and this is what our founders actually intended. And it's utterly, completely false. So he posted, this week, a post against my, friends, Mike o' Fallon and James Lindsay, suggesting, and this is a false interpretation of their position. It's a total straw man. But he said this. It's been a long time coming, but I'm glad to see Micah o' Fallon and James Lindsay officially come out against Christian morality in American politics tonight. They both said they oppose Christians advancing a biblically grounded moral vision of law and politics. Masks off. I responded to that and said this is not a fair statement of their position. They, Mike o' Fallon and James Lindsay, are against integralism, theocracy and Christian nationalism. Slash a post constitutional order where the church is the government. And I am against that too. So Mike o' Fallon is joining me now. He is the founder of sovereign nations. very sincere Christian. I know that some in our audience who are listening are a little hesitant about James Lindsay, who I think is spot on on this, because he is a, ah, an avowed, agnostic. And we're working on that. You know, trust me, Mike and I've been working on that for years. But he's right about these things. But Mike is a very sincere, ah, Christian. He shares the same biblical values, that we do here. And so we'll kind of put James aside for, for a moment so that you don't get distracted by that.
Christian nationalism argues that church should have control over state government
And Mike, you know, I want to talk about, you know, where we're at right now in this position because I think that we're, regardless of all of these other debates that maga, the far right, the gop, the establishment, the Catholics versus the evangelicals. I mean, all of those things kind of aside, a fundamental definition of what we mean by a Christian nation is really what's at issue here.
Mike o' Fallon: Yes. And I think understanding that if you were looking for a tool to deconstruct or to Balkanize what we would know as the United States today, this is the way that you would do it. You do it through integralism or neo integralism or what calls itself Christian nationalism, which is really integralism with Protestant characteristics. So it's the same thing where you have this tradition of political thought that argues That a temporal authority like the state or the state government should be subordinated to spiritual authority, the church, to promote the common good. So when you're saying common good, what is the common good? And the common good of course can be a movable object depending on what's actually happening with the church. So we would say today, especially in the post Vatican II era, that the Roman Catholic Church's beliefs and doctrines differ greatly from what they would have actually been within the 15th or 16th century. And as well we would say within our Baptist traditions or within our Presbyterian positions, although we've split and split and split and the denominations have become such a plethora of different beliefs, it's just incredible. But you would see that within those beliefs as well, we've come someplace to somewhere with the idea of that we are always reforming, of course. And Jen and I would both believe that. I think we're both basically reformed Baptists, kind of more in the MacArthurite kind of, position, if you would. But we would see then a threat of someone saying, you know what, that establishment clause in the First Amendment, just forget about that. What we need to do is we need to develop a state church. Well then the question obviously comes of who's going to be in charge of that? Who is in charge of your state church? Or is it another three letter agency? That just depends on who's occupying the White House at the time. And if that's the case, then if you can come in on the right, what happens when it comes in in the left? Well, also, what is actually going to be the doctrinal distinctives of that? And if you're saying that the church needs to have control of that? Well, how many denominations do we have in the Protestant tradition? How many different beliefs do you have within the Catholic position? What about the orthodox and their whole concepts that they have that come along with them as well? Well, where actually does this go? And if you actually take a look at the people that are sitting at the top of, let's say the Southern Baptist Convention or of the Roman Catholic Church or of the Orthodox, you know, they have the Greene patriarch, all of those people have basically progressive views. And integralism in this sense isn't necessarily a rightist view because it was mainly popularized, recently under the leftist side of things. and then after Adrian Vermeule of course converted, I think that was in 2016, and then you had Saurabh Amari as well declare, himself an integralist. And this whole new crowd of integralists began to take Over a good portion of what we call itself conservatism is that along with that you would have this kind of a root start to grow up within what was the anti woke side of the Southern Baptist Convention or the Presbyterian side or whatever the case may be. And that's where we started running into some real problems.
Jenna Ellis: M. Yeah. And you know it's, it's such a fascinating kind of twisting of the founding and of you know, the frame you mentioned, the establishment clause and the relationship between the church and the state. And obviously in a post truth, pluralistic society, like what the left would suggest, America is and should be and always has been to say, you know, diversity is our strength and because we have the establishment clause, then you know, the founders always intended to have a secular state. You know, all of those things are false. But the way that we respond to that is not saying, well the church and the government should be one and we need to bring back blasphemy laws and we need to bring back the patriarchy and overturn the 19th amendment so that women are barefoot in the kitchen at home. Can't vote. because if you look at the statistics it's you know, the the single, ah, 40 year old cat ladies who you know, tend to vote liberal. And so, you know, this is our key to unlocking the American utopia of the Christian nationalist vision. I mean that's not the correct answer, but that's what these Christian nationalists are actually selling. And they're doing it in a way, Mike, that is so intentionally vague. And then they're setting up these straw man arguments like what William Wolf is doing, suggesting that because people like you and I don't buy into their version of this utopian theocracy, that somehow we're advocating against biblical morality in government. And that couldn't be further from the truth.
Mike o' Fallon: Right. And I think if we take a look at really what the situation is, is that let's say that we lose, you know, the establishment clause, let's say that we have a state church, well now all of a sudden you and I are under the authority of that state church. What if it's a doctrine where, if it's pushing doctrines that we don't actually believe in. Well what happens at that point? Well that means that all of a sudden our cognitive liberty, our ability to believe what we believe because our consciences are seared, let's say in our case, to the word of God, well now we must violate that conscience or else we are actually standing against the state. So what happens at that point are we looking at then starting to have, you know, executions and so forth for people that don't believe the right things? Because the eternal destiny of man is so much more important than the temporal meaning that if you're like a thief and you steal something or whatever you do get, you get the stocks and you get whipped and whatever the case may be, but if you are someone who's violating the eternal end of man, that that is something that you should pay with your life. So if we're actually starting to suggest that that's a better scheme of things, and you hear this from people that are associated with some of the organizations that William is a part of, William Wolf, that is. But you also see people that are within those organizations, like Eryn Wren, basically suggesting that we need to use postmodernism and critical theory within our understanding of the Church in the Bible. And now we're just back to where we were just seven years ago. So what this is, is not really a different thing than what happened on the woke left side of things. Because the woke left movement within Protestantism and within Catholicism and within Orthodoxy was actually more of an intergalist movement. So you would have a document that came out, and was, it was an encyclical, I think it was 2016 or 2015, coming along the same debut of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals of the United nations that were as well adopted by the World Economic Forum. It was called Laudato Si. And Laudato Si was the document that came out from the Roman Catholic Church that basically agreed with all of the principles that were there and the Goals of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations. And that in essence is where you're looking at things like social justice. Social justice is an integralist concept. That's part of the whole deal. The idea of an economic system that is not capitalism and it's not completely communism, but it's distributism. That's a concept from integralism. So when we take a look back at some of the early encyclicals of the Catholic Church that actually define what integralism is and how it works, you would look at, Quanta cur, I believe it was. I think that was the first one. That's Pope Pius IX and then Immortale dei, that was from Pope Leo xiii. And if you recall, Jenna, you and I were talking about this about a year ago at a meeting we were both at. And I was saying, well, what's the thing with Pope Leo xiv. Why is he Pope Leo xiv? Because he's going to continue the mission of Pope Leo xiii. So now we're going to have a transition, or they're hoping to have a transition into interdalism as, our governing system that we would have. And that doesn't matter if it's on the left or the right. It's still saying that those that are the faith leaders will be the ones that determine what happens in the temporal sense of governance.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, and this is such a dangerous ideology. And this is exactly what the founders, you know, coming them, the Church of England and that split with, with the Catholic Church and what they saw when there was a gospel or even a false gospel that was attempted to be advanced by force and coercion, what they envisioned for religious liberty was not suggesting that morality itself is divorced from government, but that the church and those who are in the ecclesia and who run the church are not over the jurisdiction of the civil government in any sense of a theocracy. And so what is really, important to understand about this particular debate is that when we see some of the dominant kind of integralist and frankly pluralistic secularist, rhetoric and arguments coming from the left, it's very easy for Christians to recognize that and to dismiss it because it's coming from the left. But when arguments like this are advanced from people who we've already kind of accepted into our own camp, like people who are part of the SBC and their pastors and, you know, they're they're conservative commentators, you know, maybe, that is where discernment is incredibly necessary and very valuable because right now on the right, and this is where Ben Shapiro in his speech at Heritage in December was so spot on when he was saying we can't just listen to anyone who calls themselves a conservative, just like we in the Kingdomnomics of God know that we can't listen to just anyone who calls themselves a Christian. And so where do we need to be more focused in recognizing kind of not only the false gospel that this is presenting this viewpoint, but the ultimately the false view of a biblical form of civil government as well?
Mike o' Fallon: Yeah, I think anytime that someone says that we need to form, ah, another government, or that maybe we can say that the floor joints have basically rotted out from the United States and we need to replace those with a new foundation, a new founding, once someone starts suggesting that that's actually what we need in the end is to get rid of our Constitution.
Mike Fallon: The American project actually had its source from Scotland
Look, look where it's gotten us today. You could say the same thing if you wanted to about the Bible then, because there's all sorts of progressive concepts and really bad ideas from people who claim to be Christians as well as people that claim to be Americans or people that believe that they should be, in governmental positions within the United States that have really bad ideas. So there's nothing wrong with gatekeeping, in my understanding, of things, of people that are not along with the American project. And that American project actually had its source from Scotland. And if you think about the killing times in Scotland that occurred, this is after basically the Church of England had already been the official church of the entire United Kingdomnomics. Is, of course, they had possession to some extent of Scotland. Is that then because the Scottish were refusing to follow the edicts of the king and they said, no, we will not do that. This is what our faith is. Well, then you had to pay with your life. So in many ways, the American experiment is basically the Scottish Revolution happening in what we would call North America and saying that, no, what we need to do is we need to make sure that we don't have a church that is over the state and that we need to have cognitive liberty. Let's say that, that, you know, whomever it is that takes control of this new institution that they want to put in place believes in pedo baptism. Well, I don't believe in pedo baptism. I don't believe Jenna does either. We believe in baptism after confession, but what if that's just not the law of the land anymore? Then we just have to follow it so our conscience no longer matters and our, our choice in terms of what we believe to be true then disappears.
Jenna Ellis: Wow. Well, we're going to take a break right here, but Mike, o' Fallon is going to continue this conversation, with me. He's the founder of sovereign nations when we come back after the break. This is such an important discussion because we have to know as Christians what the Bible teaches about God's authority, what it teaches about the different and separate jurisdictions of the civil government, the church government and the family. And then how we advocate for biblical morality within the confines of ordered liberty that God himself requires. Not just, you know, the founders, because they're our founders. I mean, they can get things wrong and they had. And we can debate that, but we can't ultimately debate what God himself has proclaimed as truth. So we will be right back with more.
Jenna Ellis: Christian nationalists would like to bring back coerced Christian beliefs
: welcome back to Jenna Ellis in the Morning on American Family Radio.
Jenna Ellis: Welcome back. And I'm here with my special guest for this Program Mike o', Fallon, who is the founder of Sovereign nations, and, they provide some really, really great resources on this topic. We're talking about the legitimate form of civil government under God's ordered liberty and what that means for morality in government, what that means for the separate jurisdictions of the civil government, the church government and the family government. What that means for the ongoing conversation of Christian nationalists who would like to bring back, coerced Christian beliefs and actions rather than actually have religious freedom in the sense of that the founders contended and in fact enshrined in our US Constitution and what their actual aim is, which is basically, you know, Mike, going all the way back to Constantine. Right? I mean, when you had, when you had someone who's a Roman emperor suggesting that it was now against the law to not be a Christian, how did that affect society? Well, then you just got a bunch of fake Christians who, who are professing to be Christians just to abide by the law and not be punished. But you didn't have any actual conversion. I mean, there were some, of course, through the real Church, but you. But it just was yet another example in world history about how the Church's calling is not to be coercive through seizing power, but to a legitimate government to allow the Church and to provide the forum of freedom and the liberty that the Church then can go and proselytize a dying culture. Because that's what the Church is called to do is to proclaim the truth, not to seize power. And can Christians be in government? Absolutely. And they should. And we should select and prefer Christians as our leaders, but those leaders should not be the same as the Church leaders. Otherwise what? The history of the Church and the state has reminded us that, as you posted in a response to William Wolfe, it reminds us that when theological truth becomes entangled with coercive authority, the result is often a dilution of both.
Mike o' Fallon: That's correct. Now, if you think back, we don't have to go back into the 18th century or the 19th century or even go back to the 4th century to think of where integralism as a system was used in some sense. and that would be going back to France. And if we think of the collapse of the Third Republic in 1940 and when the Third Reich took over France, what they turned to was this concept of a national, religious, traditional move. And it was what you would see in Vichy France. And so this idea of it being the true France and this national revolution that takes place. Liberty, ah, equality, fraternity, and so forth. and then the elimination of, the secular, you know, in Republican ideologies. It did have as well, a very antisemitic pillar to it, if you will. So this antisemitism was also important in shipping out the Jewish population to internment camps in Germany and other places within Eastern Europe. So this was a awful thing that happened within the scope of World War II. And so that wasn't that long ago. So when people start talking about the Post World War II liberal consensus, this is one of the things that they definitely didn't want to have happen again. and those were good things. That's a good thing. You didn't want to have a Nazi or a Vichy France kind of situation where you would have the church participating in hunting, down those that are not of the same faith, that are not truly French, if you will, and making sure that, they're sent away to camps. But a lot of things like that are even being suggested now. And we can see kind of like in the development or the evolution, I think, of someone like Joel Webbin, and I think, Jenna, you might remember, you know, back just four or five years ago, Joel Webin was a very reasonable, good apologist that was. That had his podcast and did a good show and very complimentary of myself and James Lindsay. But then all of a sudden, after this thing started to grow up that you and I both saw in 2022 and 2023, that kind of came from this new founding, an American reformer kind of generated this, this bitter root that was within the especially reform circles. Then you saw the same thing happening. And I'm sorry if I have to say this name, but General Flynn, within the larger scope of charismatic and large church movements that are not necessarily part of the Southern Baptist Convention of the pca, more of a popularized non reformed version of this, is that you saw this idea where he would say in front of crowds, we need to have one nation with one God and one religion. Well, who's in charge of saying what that is? Or do we have a majority vote? Well, the only way that you can actually achieve that is if you Balkanize the nation. If you come in and you basically say, you know what we need to have? We have a national divorce. But that national divorce needs to happen 60 happen in 60 different kinds of identity groups. Need by, divide them by race, need to divide them by sexual preference, need to divide them by religion. And if you're going in that kind of direction, well, then you're going to get Basically your technocratic 15 minute cities that we said we were so afraid of when the leftists were saying that that's what they wanted to do. But now we're going to bring it
Jenna Ellis: in on the right m. And you know, it's almost playing into the left's, intentional game, their theory that they've gamed out, which is to say, okay, well, fine, you know, you guys on in the red states can, you know, try to, outlaw abortion, you know, put up your, all of your moral laws and whatever, as long as the blue states are allowed to do whatever they want to do. And you know, this kind of national divorce that ultimately, according to the left, it never is, okay, we're going to just divorce and then leave you alone. It's that once, then they get the foothold of. All right, it is now reasonable and it's predictable and it's acceptable for us to have all of our laws according to the political theories that we prefer. Then we're going to go and challenge your red state laws in the Supreme Court and under our system of an oligarchy of, you know, the nine rogue justices, we're going to actually force our view of things on you. Because it's never a divorce that actually works. It's just like the separation of church and state. And even, you know, alluding Back to John MacArthur. I mean, he even changed his mind on this. And I did an interview with him after I represented him against Gavin Newsom and the state, encroaching into his own church and telling them that they had to shut down during the whole Covid narrative. He actually changed his position and said that he did in that interview with me, that listeners can go back and then listen to. I mean, it was on our airwaves here as well, saying, you know, no, if we just retreat into our churches and we don't advocate for laws that are built on objective moral truth, then eventually we get to a left dominated society. So the question though, Mike, is we all know this. It's so patently obvious from history and from all of the times that, you know, we've tried all of this from, you know, the Balkanizing of, you know, of Europe and you know, all of these places where, you know, it's been, fragmented and you know, empires have fallen and split and we could go through that world history. So are people right now like the Joel Webbins, the William Wolf's, the Stephen Wolfs? Do they just not know this? And, and do you think that they're sincerely advocating for this. Like, maybe AOC is sincerely advocating for. For, you know, democratic socialism because she thinks that her way has never been tried and it'll work. Or are they actual infiltrators on the right because they know what they're doing and they just want to seize power?
Mike o' Fallon: Well, I think you remember back to. I think the guy's name was Mr. Reagan, I think was his handle that did the whole piece on aoc. And what he was exposing at the time is that AOC wasn't necessarily like a firebrand, you know, like, really dedicated progressive that came up and just wanted to run for office. You know, kind, of grassroots. No, she was an actress who answered a casting call for someone to run for that position within the House of Representatives. And much like that, I think what we have are a lot of actors. I, think that this probably irritated, Mr. Wolf quite a bit. But I basically said that Kari Pray Jean Bowler, who is the. Now, I think she's been a Catholic for 10 months, the woman who got, kicked off of the Religious Liberty Commission, after her outrage and so forth of, Zionism, et cetera, et cetera. And there was, like, three other Catholics on the panel. And now she's trying to, she's trying to claim that it's because she was, she was Catholic, that she was kicked off. No, it's because you were out of control and you couldn't discuss things in a. In a civil manner. Well, now she's, of course, immediately she goes on Tucker Carlsen. She's blown up. And you know her. She's increased her following by 200,000 or whatever the case may be on Twitter. And I suggested that William Wolf basically is the Southern Baptist version of Kari preaching. Bowler, you know, is that you have somebody that comes from nowhere. He was first an intern at, Capitol Hill Baptist Church under Mark Dever in 2021, and then became an intern under Al Mueller in 2021 and 2022. And then immediately he's catapulted to success by basically shouting down, other people with confidence, bias and so forth, and is getting all these opportunities to be on all these shows when the guy. No one had ever heard of him before, outside of the fact that he had served in the Trump administration for a couple of years. I believe it is a Defense Department or the State Department. But if it was in the Defense Department, that was under Mark Esperance, who was as woke as the day is long. So there's something that's going on here.
George Floyd: Christian nationalism is meant to split and divide America
And I think the question I would ask the audience to think about is, well, what happens? What happens, let's say if. If all of a sudden we are Balkanized, let's say that we do shatter our nation into bits. And you have to live in your small Christian nation or your small Christian, feudalistic society that's somewhere between Kentucky and Tennessee or whatever, because you can't. You can have your own truth there as opposed to someplace else that has their black liberation truth or someone else has their Islamic truth or whatever the case may be. What eventually happens to evangelism? How are you going to evangelize? Because evangelism is about going up to someone who does not have your beliefs and you're explaining to them this is the way, the truth and the life. This is the gospel. This is not just your path to salvation, but to a transformed life and a transformed mind, a renewing of your mind here on earth. you can't do that anymore. Because once you're in a place that is filled with people that don't believe the same thing you do, well, then that's going to be illegal. So this applies across the board. It's meant to shatter. It's not actually meant to bring the whole nation to a truth. It is meant to split and divide.
Jenna Ellis: M. And. And this is the danger, you know, of all of this. And, you know, shortly before we came on air, this morning, Mike, you were. You and I were talking about how, you know, this has been a message, you know, that you have been, trying to sound the alarm for years. And, you know, honestly, for listeners to know. I mean, and I was telling Mike this as well, but for, sovereign nations and the ministry that Mike o', Fallon, has. Has endeavored to provide to Christians, I don't. I wouldn't have known the. The truth and the full understanding of what the Christian nationalist movement is actually advocating for. And it. This became so clear to me, not just in my personal conversations, obviously, with. With Mike o' Fallon and James Lindsay and others, but also in a really important resource from sovereign Nations. And, for those of you this weekend, you know, if you have an hour or so, you know, I think is about all that. It is maybe a little longer than that. Go to Sovereign nations, go to their website, and there is a seminar by Bill Roach talking about the truth of what Christian nationalism is actually advocating for. I want you to watch that this weekend with your family. Send it to your pastor. People need to understand this, Mike, because what. What people Think the Christian nationalist movement. What I thought, honestly, I thought, well, I'm m. I'm a Christian and I'm, you know, I love my country and I'm a nationalist. So of course I'm a Christian nationalist. They don't understand what the movement of cn, you know, tm, what that's actually advocating for. And this is such an incredible important resource.
Mike o' Fallon: Well, thank you for that and, right back at you. But I would say I think it's important for people to understand that this is part of a dialectical move. And in that same conference that, Jenna is directing you to, I would suggest, listening to some of the presentations. I did a presentation on progressive integralism and what that really is, and understanding that this whole move of Christian nationalism, which is integralism as well, but not pointing back to the Catholic Church necessarily yet. but then this, this also, this move that it is dialectical political warfare. So you first had woke left. And our reaction to that, our reaction to Covid, our reaction to what they tried to do to all of society because of the precipitating, death of George Floyd. And that action then meant that we need to employ dei, we need to employ critical race theory into everything that we have. Well, this is the reaction mode to that. But in a sense it's doing the same thing. And it's saying, well, you see that it's actually us white people that are oppressed, it's Christians that are oppressed, et cetera, et cetera. So you're bringing that victimhood mentality, and you're creating eventually a movement that is filled with vengeance. It's filled with revenge. And there is no part of the gospel that has vengeance and revenge involved in it. Vengeance or revenge alone is. That's God. That's what God is able to do within the course of history. And he is fully sovereign.
Jenna Ellis: Amen. And amen. And so you can go to sovereignnations.com, that's sovereignnations.com and then just click on the video tab, and you'll see, you know, all of these resources right there. And, it is so important that Christians are educated in this, that we understand this more deeply. this isn't just an aspect of, governance and American politics or even world history. You know, this goes directly, Mike, to our basic theology as well. Because if we are taken in by, you know, these, these quote unquote Christians that are actually presenting a false gospel because they're suggesting that Christianity must be coercive, and they're arguing in A large part as well, for dominion theology, that, you know, that Christians just need to dominate and take over the world by force, and that that will then, usher in the second coming of Christ. I mean, these are things that are actual heresies that, you know, we have for a long time in the systematic theology that has been accepted by church fathers, by, you know, Evangelical Protestantism, as a whole, for centuries. You know, these are things that are very fundamental. And so this isn't just something that you can say, well, you know, yeah, they're Christians. Maybe they disagree on a few policy things here and there. We can, you know, kind of just let it go. No, this is incredibly essential.
Jenna Ellis: Christian nationalism is opposed to liberty itself
And so in just the last few minutes in this segment, what are a couple. I mean, how would. How would you characterize maybe a couple of the key distinctions of, the mainstream Christian nationalist movement so that people are actually aware of what it is that they are suggesting their version of American utopia looks like?
Mike o' Fallon: Well, first of all, I think you should point out that it is opposed to liberty. Now, they keep on using the word liberalism, but liberty itself. And so liberty in and of itself is something that we have in the United States. And it's a new project, if you will, like there's never been anywhere else in the world. And so people that are Christian nationalists, and integralists as well, they would basically criticize what you would call a constitutional republic that has a liberal democracy, that's involved in the governance, therefore, because of the fact that we are the ones that decide what laws, what rules, what amendments we want in our society. So they would say that they should be separated, politics should not be separated from religious truth. And believing that if you do this, it's going to lead to this kind of atomized individualism. And it's in that atomized individualism that you don't have the common good. So that's the first thing they're going to demand, that we need to have one religion. They're also going to say that we need to divide people from an understanding of heritage Americans. So they say that, look, people that are of European descent, we're the ones that really need to have dominion, over these things. And we need to have our own nation and we need to expel those that are even recent, arrivals that came through legally. like, for instance, my Abuela Nabuelo came from Cuba. my wife, her family immigrated from Hong Kong many years ago. Is that. No, we need to send those people back. We need to have A society that's not plural in that sense, that we need to have one culture, and it needs to be an Anglo culture. And they would also, you notice that these people are Machiavellian, and they don't mind lying about things in order to achieve their ends. They also have a tendency to do nothing but talk about the Jews in Israel, which is quite obvious, I think, to everybody now. And that is all part of a larger, you could almost say a Christian nationalist integralist, intersectionality. So you have people that are Cesareo, papists, fascists. You have people that are, somewhere like, within a monarchist framework, like Curtis Yarvin. You'd have people like Patrick Deneen, R.R. reno and so forth that as well have, with RR Rienow, he's retreated to Hungary and he's living there now. And he's a Catholic integralist that comes back to the United States all the time. So we need to be cautious of these things, and we need to just make sure that people are telling the truth, they're proclaiming the gospel and that as well, that they seek to keep our union together, our constitutional republic. And if they are opposed to those things, well, they're not part of the same project that you and I are.
Jenna Ellis: Amen to that. Well, we have to take one more break here, and then we will be back, here on Jenna Ellis in the Morning with my special guest, Mike o', Fallon, to wrap things up and continue to talk about this very dangerous ideology that has become known as Christian nationalism. We'll be right back.
Jenna Ellis: Christian nationalism seeks to undermine U.S. Constitution
: Welcome back to Jenna Ellis in the Morning on American Family Radio.
Jenna Ellis: Welcome back. And I'm here with my special guest, Mike o', Fallon, who's the founder of Sovereign Nations. And again, you can find those resources@sovereign nations.com I would encourage you to go and listen to those resources, especially on Integralism and also on, Christian Nationalism this, weekend. Don't delay. Make it a point and a priority to be educated in these areas. It is important to our thorough understanding of theology, which is the things of God and truth. And so, you know, as we're moving forward, in this mike, and we're kind of barreling toward 2028. And who's going to take over for, ah, Donald Trump when, you know, ultimately he's not going to be on the ballot in 2028. And as much as he might wish that he was or still kind of, you know, project that he isn't going to be on the ballot. And so, you know, the question then becomes, you know, why on earth would we, as Christians, as conservatives, advocate for a movement that is seeking intentionally to overhaul and undermine our U.S. constitution, which is what we, I mean, the entire conservative movement is defined by, is conserving truth, conserving our founding, conserving our American law and order and way of life.
Mike o' Fallon: Yeah. this is actually a project to disrupt and dismantle what we know is the United States of America. And would you say, Jenna, that a movement that is calling itself Christian, that's trying to get into every major denomination that is evangelical, reformed, et cetera, it's already growing within Catholicism, within orthodoxy, that seeks to displace, our Constitution and suggest, regime change or civil war or Balkanization. Would you say that that is almost like an act of treason?
Jenna Ellis: I mean. Yeah, by definition. Right. Because this, is where it's so surprising that anyone on the right, any conservative worth their salt, if they are in good faith arguing that they're a conservative, and obviously a Christian, would advocate for a theory that is by definition, and openly and publicly challenging the US Constitution and wanting to overhaul our entire system of government. I mean, when Nancy Pelosi and AOC and the left want to dismantle the Second Amendment, when they want to ignore the Constitution, when they want the rise of the Supreme Court oligarchy, you know, when they. When they're advocating for a systematic overhaul, we call them traitors. And yet when it comes from the right, just because it's labeled Christian and it's saying, hey, you know, we can force our morality onto everybody else, then we sit back and go, well, you know, I might like that, because then our people are in charge. Well, no, it has to be that we are a nation of laws, not a nation of kings. And ultimately, this is what the Christian nationalist movement is trying to dismantle, is our system of ordered liberty that has God as the divine lawgiver and we the people, just as those who are under his authority and. And who, by our consent, have our government structure the way that it is, they want to remove all that and institute kings of their own making, just like the left wants to do the same thing. And it's wrong and dangerous on both sides.
Mike o' Fallon: Right. So if you get to a point where everybody wants revolution, which is the goal. The goal is to basically say, you know, this whole American project, it was doomed from the start. you know, we need to go back, and you'll hear this quite often from a lot of people that are playing Christian nationalists, is they'll say that you Know when it was really right was, was before actually this whole revolution, this whole idea breaking from the king and from the church, that was wrong. We shouldn't have done that. you'll hear them start to say things like this, because the idea is you want to get rid of the revolution and then you also want to then go back and you want to say, well, I want to get rid of Westphalia and the Peace of Westphalia, which happened, you know, after the 30 years war, which then happened after the defenestration of Prague, which happened after the Peace of Augsburg, which happened after the Reformation. So the idea is you want to go back to this idea of whose realm, their religion, wherever your region is, you can have your religion. But over everything, of course, was the Holy Roman Empire. So think of that from a digital perspective now is you're looking for techno feudalism to where you break up America. You break up America from these ideas of states that have some degree of sovereignty under a federal system. And now you go to something where you create these micro feudalist societies that are overall basically ruled by a larger authority. But no longer can America be the main global hegemony. So now you're looking at replacing everything with bricks. And this is one of the reasons why you have all the Christian nationalists freaking out about what's actually happening in Iran right now. And the reason that they're freaking out about that is because in the end, one of the plans is the rise of China and brics as the main system and multipolarity, which is Alexander Dugin's idea. This is why they're all fans of Alexander Dugan, the Gnostic wizard. And then what you would have is the replacement of what was the American free capitalist, free market system with then a very authoritarian top down digital system in more or less a technocracy. But you can believe whatever you want to believe in your own little micro feudalist, you know, state that you have. That's the idea. So we get rid of the American project, we, we get rid of the concept where you and I are free and sovereign individuals to believe what we want to believe and do what we want to do. And you know that Jenna wants to have a podcast and a job and so forth because we're moving into a post work world. So you're creating a situation that would actually work in a post work world where no longer are you a free individual to earn and live your life as you see fit.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, and this is so scary. And one of the other things that you will hear as well from the advocates of Christian nationalism is that, you know, our Constitution just isn't working anymore. You know, it just doesn't have enough restraint on evil. It just doesn't have, you know, enough power to impose morality. It's just not working anymore because the Democrats or because, you know, X reason. And so this is an attempt to undermine and dismantle everything that conservatives have been championing for the last 250 years, since the founding. This is by definition, not constitutional conservatism, and it is by definition not Christianity as premised in biblical truth of ordered liberty, a government that is based on God's design. And so you cannot be a sincere Christian in terms of wanting to follow what God expressly says for the government and want the same things that these Christian nationalists want. I mean, that's really the bottom line. So. Closing thoughts Mike?
Mike o' Fallon: Well, I would hope that your audience would consider, really using discernment in terms of who they're supporting, what ideas they hear, when people are starting to say, you know, what we really need is we need to have, God back in, control of America through a church system that somehow supersedes or is above our governance system.
Jenna Ellis: think about the implications of that. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, think about the implications of that and why that hasn't worked throughout history. Go to sovereignnations.com Listen to those resources. Follow Mike O' Fallon on X. And as always, you can reach me and my team, Jenna fr dot net.
Jenna and Mike dissect the rhetoric surrounding the current political landscape, emphasizing the importance of discernment within the conservative movement.
Live
Did you know American Family Radio is listener-supported? Your monthly financial support will allow us to continue upholding Godly values through our numerous channels, like American Family Radio, One Million Moms, The Stand magazine, and many more.
Become a Great Commission Partner TODAY to help AFR transform culture by rebuilding the family. When you donate today, you’ll get access to:
