Radical secularists are attempting to unmoor nations from their essential purposes by tarring conservatives as “Christian nationalists.” Erasing the boundaries of nations, particularly nations that are particularly clear-eyed about their Christian missions, is crucial for the ascendancy of this ideology. In an American-Hungarian comparison, arguments are made below in support of the above statements.

Radical secularists are attempting to unmoor nations from their essential purposes by tarring conservatives as “Christian nationalists.” To be clear, this radical secular movement is not a movement for pluralism or equality. Rather, it is a movement bent on privileging a particular dogma, an atheistic one, throughout the world’s organs and institutions. Erasing the boundaries of nations, particularly nations that are particularly clear-eyed about their Christian missions, is crucial for the ascendancy of this ideology.

Since America’s founding, its citizens have believed in God’s particular purpose for their nation. The Declaration of Independence references “Nature’s God” and asserts that people are “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights.” This foundational belief has persisted through pivotal moments in American history, from the First Great Awakening to the civil rights movement, illustrating a belief that America has a divine mission to enact God’s will, not only domestically but globally. This has been evidenced in movements such as the abolition of slavery and the promotion of democracy and free markets.

Hungary provides a more recent example of a nation explicitly intertwining its national identity with its Christian heritage. The Hungarian constitution, the Fundamental Law, enacted in 2011, opens with the phrase “God bless the Hungarians” and emphasizes the role of Christianity in preserving nationhood. Article K) of the Fundamental Law of Hungary explicitly references the importance of Christian culture in the nation’s identity, reinforcing the ranks of the Greek or Irish constitutions, but is a stark contrast to many secular ones among European nations.

The European Union’s legal framework often promotes a secular and pluralistic approach. The Treaty on European Union (TEU) emphasizes values such as human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, and the rule of law (Article 2 TEU). Within the Council of Europe, encompassing all EU Member States as well, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has consistently upheld secularism as a cornerstone of European constitutionalism, as seen in cases like Lautsi v. Italy (2011), where the court ruled on the presence of crucifixes in Italian public schools.

The American context, however, reflects a balance between secular governance and religious freedom. The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution prohibits the establishment of religion while protecting the free exercise thereof, a dual commitment to preventing governmental imposition of religion while ensuring individuals’ rights to religious expression. This balancing act is seen in Supreme Court decisions like Everson v. Board of Education (1947) and Town of Greece v. Galloway (2014), where the court navigated the complex interplay between church and state.

Hungary’s approach, on the other hand, has been criticized by EU functionaries in Brussels as authoritarian and a potential threat to the secularism and pluralism foundational to the European Union. Critics argue that Hungary’s constitutional commitment to Christianity undermines these values, as seen in frequent critiques and legal challenges within EU institutions. However, Hungary’s government asserts that this commitment is a continuation of its historical and cultural identity, resisting a homogenizing globalist agenda.

At the EU’s “second” founding, there was significant debate about whether to include a reference to Europe’s Christian heritage in its constitutional documents. Proponents argued that Christianity had a foundational role in shaping Europe’s identity, values, and cultural heritage. They contended that acknowledging this heritage would reflect the historical realities of Europe’s development. However, opponents maintained that the EU should embody a secular, pluralistic ethos, representing a diverse range of beliefs and cultures within its member states. Ultimately, the decision was made to omit explicit references to Christianity, emphasizing instead universal values like human dignity and democracy.

The perception of Hungary as a challenge to EU principles is based on the misconception that its Christian nationalism opposes its neighbors. In reality, Hungary’s example highlights the possibility for nations to celebrate their unique identities and cultural heritages while contributing to a greater good and to being united in diversity, as the EU’s own motto suggests. The EU’s insistence on uniformity (instead of unity) often disregards the diverse historical narratives and cultural contexts of its member states, which could instead be seen as strengths contributing to the collective richness of the Union.

By prioritizing their unique national expressions of faith, nations like Hungary and the United States demonstrate a commitment to their historical and divine purposes. This is not a call for conflict but for a diverse unity, where nations respect and celebrate each other’s distinct roles in glorifying God. The EU and the broader West can learn from this model by acknowledging and embracing their foundational values and inherent purposes, fostering an environment where pluralism and faith coexist harmoniously.

As individual citizens, embracing a proudly Christian societal identity means loving God, our nations, and people of good faith from all nations, appreciating the unique contributions each brings to God’s kingdom. This vision calls for a pluralism rooted not in secular uniformity but in a rich tapestry of distinct national identities united in a shared mission, which would be in line with the EU’s own motto as mentioned above.

Tim Rosenberger is a legal fellow at the Manhattan Institute. Tim holds a JD/MBA from Stanford University, where he was President of the Federalist Society and on Law Review, and an LL.M. from the University of Vienna. His work on education policy provided the foundation for the New Workforce Development Council, which seeks to move America’s education system towards competency-based certifications of learning that provides pathways to purposeful work. Tim’s policy interests lie at the intersection of law, faith, education, and business.