This dissertation considers the place of religious argument in the public sphere. While deliberation about religion’s place in the formal public sphere within the United States has often been seen as taking place in a two-dimensional space, with Christian nationalism and pure secularism representing the opposite deliberative positions, I argue that in reality, rhetorical engagements over the place of religion often are contested by arguments hewing to Christian Nationalism on one side, but a kind of civic religious pluralism on the other. This dissertation explores the tensions that exist within public discourse in the United States between Christian nationalism and larger secular society. Rather than seeing secularism as a counterweight to Christian nationalism, I argue that instead a civic religious pluralism that allows for religious thought to enter the domain of public deliberation is present in arguments about religion’s role in the democratic process. I also argue that this problem is extended into the three-dimensional space through an added tension between religious citizens who wish to remain isolated from secular culture and the state which must maintain some sense of cultural participation among all of its citizens. Through rhetorical analyses of three cases, I develop a more nuanced perspective on this deliberative space and contend at the end that the civic religious pluralism I find in two of my cases represents a more effective response to nationalist rhetoric than a pure secularist opposition.

Numerous studies show biblicist Christianity, religiosity, and conservative political identity are strong predictors of Americans holding skeptical attitudes toward publicly controversial aspects of science, such as human evolution. We show that Christian nationalism—meaning the desire to see particularistic and exclusivist versions of Christian symbols, values, and policies enshrined as the established religion of the United States—is a strong and consistent predictor of Americans’ attitudes about science above and beyond other religious and political characteristics. Further, a majority of the overall effect of political ideology on skepticism about the moral authority of science is mediated through Christian nationalism, indicating that political conservatives are more likely to be concerned with particular aspects of science primarily because they are more likely to be Christian nationalists. Likewise, substantial proportions of the well‐documented associations between religiosity and biblical “literalism” with views of science are mediated through Christian nationalism. Because Christian nationalism seeks to establish a particular and exclusivist vision of Christianity as the dominant moral order, adherents feel threatened by challenges to the epistemic authority undergirding that order, including by aspects of science perceived as challenging the supremacy of biblicist authority.

Thesis advisor: Marilyn Cochran-Smith / This dissertation presents an ethno-case study explaining how students at a conservative Christian high school were socialized into ideas about civic and public life in a pluralistic society. Drawing on democratic educational theory and institutional theory to analyze ethnographic data gathered during a full school year of observations, interviews, and document collection, this dissertation addresses the following questions: (1) What are the logics, practices, and symbolic representations concerning civic identity and participation in democratic society conveyed explicitly and implicitly at a conservative Christian high school? (2) How do students understand and engage with ideas about civic identity and participation conveyed at that school? (3) How do families understand and engage with these ideas about civic identity and participation? This dissertation argues that the school was organized around a theo-political institutional logic committed to the absolute truth of Christianity. This logic was symbolically represented in the language and concepts of the “Christian worldview” and reinforced through consistent and recurrent school practices that shaped students’ behavior and their ways of interpreting the world. This theo-political logic, which was pervasive throughout formal and informal curriculum and instruction at the school, presented an all-encompassing vision of Christianity as “the truth” and offered a coherent connection between doctrinal beliefs and actual behavior. This logic was also notable for what it omitted and lacked, particularly acknowledgment of the racialized nature of schooling and society, attention to the pluralism of worldviews in a diverse democratic nation, and recognition of the systemic and structural causes of injustice in society. The emphases as well as the omissions of the theo-political logic at the school shaped students’ civic identity as first and foremost a religious identity, which meant engaging with society to promote conservative social policies, candidates, and political perspectives. The dissertation shows that students largely embraced the theo-political logic that animated the school, and their parents chose the school because of the presence of this logic. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2023. / Submitted to: Boston College. Lynch School of Education. / Discipline: Teacher Education, Special Education, Curriculum and Instruction.

No description available.

Religiously conservative Americans consistently demonstrate lower scientific literacy than other Americans. Some argue, however, that Americans’ scientific literacy is contingent on subcultural conflict, showing differences in scientific literacy that emerge only on religiously contested scientific claims. Building on these insights, we find that the most salient factor explaining Americans’ divergence on contested (though not on uncontested) scientific claims is not religious commitment or conservatism per se, but an ideology that seeks political—and consequently epistemic—dominance: Christian nationalism. National data show that Christian nationalism is unassociated with Americans’ answers on questions about uncontested scientific knowledge. However, Christian nationalism is the strongest predictor of incorrect answers on questions about religiously contested scientific claims. Contemporary “culture war” debates over science have little to do with outright ignorance of science, nor are they strictly about religiosity or theological conservatism. Rather, disputes over science and religion reflect politically motivated denials of scientific facts that threaten Christian nationalism’s claims to epistemic and cultural authority.

Some of the strongest predictors of voting for Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election were Christian nationalism and antipathy toward Muslims and immigrants. We examine the interrelated influence of these three factors on Americans’ intentions to vote for Trump in 2020. Consistent with previous research, Christian nationalism and Islamophobia remained strong and significant predictors of intention to vote for Trump; however, the effect of xenophobia was stronger. Further, xenophobia and Islamophobia significantly and substantially mediated the effects of Christian nationalism. Consequently, though Christian nationalism remains theoretically and empirically distinct as a cultural framework, its influence on intending to vote for Trump in 2020 is intimately connected to fears about ethnoracial outsiders. In the penultimate year before Trump’s reelection campaign, the strongest predictors of supporting Trump, in order of magnitude, were political party, xenophobia, identifying as African American (negative), political ideology, Christian nationalism, and Islamophobia.

Religiously conservative Americans consistently demonstrate lower scientific literacy than other Americans. Some argue, however, that Americans’ scientific literacy is contingent on subcultural conflict, showing differences in scientific literacy that emerge only on religiously contested scientific claims. Building on these insights, we find that the most salient factor explaining Americans’ divergence on contested (though not on uncontested) scientific claims is not religious commitment or conservatism per se, but an ideology that seeks political—and consequently epistemic—dominance: Christian nationalism. National data show that Christian nationalism is unassociated with Americans’ answers on questions about uncontested scientific knowledge. However, Christian nationalism is the strongest predictor of incorrect answers on questions about religiously contested scientific claims. Contemporary “culture war” debates over science have little to do with outright ignorance of science, nor are they strictly about religiosity or theological conservatism. Rather, disputes over science and religion reflect politically motivated denials of scientific facts that threaten Christian nationalism’s claims to epistemic and cultural authority.

The Appalachian Preaching Missions (1955-1981) occurred annually in Northeast Tennessee, with their predecessor, the Bristol Preaching Mission, dating back to at least 1949. Local churches, primarily Protestant, organized and convened these annual ecumenical gatherings. Nationally known clergy and laypeople from various denominations spoke, with up to several thousand congregants attending each mission. These individuals provided sermons and speeches on spiritual, domestic, and international issues. Among the most consistently repeated sermon themes was Christianity’s spiritual conflict with atheistic communism. This work addresses the missions’ origins and how the speakers spoke on international Christian missions in decolonized or developing nations as threatened by communist regimes, anxieties of nuclear proliferation, and the need for ecumenical cooperation. This work demonstrates that the choice of subject matter and speakers at the missions reflected wider American anti-communism, an increased politicization of Christianity, and ecumenical coalition building.

The present work explores the rhetorical elements of Christian nationalism in Brazil through a rhetoric dog-whistle analysis. The objective of this work is to understand how a multivocal appeal in the discourse of Pentecostalist political leaders can unite two distinct groups, such as evangelicals and the conservative right through the same rhetoric. The work is built on an analysis of the strategic rhetoric of speeches and posts on social media by three Pentecostal pastors who at the same time hold a high elective political position. The focus of this analysis is Bethany Albertson's theory of dog-whistle politics through thematic content analysis. The results show that there are four themes that stand out in this strategic rhetoric, which consist of "defense of Israel," "defense of the traditional family," "patriotism," and "freedom of expression." This set of themes strengthens the multivocal appeal of religious and political leaders, matching the narrative of Christian nationalism. / O presente trabalho explora os elementos retóricos do nacionalismo cristão no Brasil através de uma análise retórica chamada de "dog-whistle". O objetivo deste trabalho é entender como um apelo multivocal no discurso de líderes políticos pentecostalistas pode unir dois grupos distintos, como os evangélicos e a direita conservadora, através da mesma retórica. O trabalho é construído a partir de uma análise da retórica estratégica de discursos e postagens nas redes sociais de três pastores pentecostais que, ao mesmo tempo, ocupam um alto cargo político eletivo. O foco desta análise é a teoria de Bethany Albertson sobre "dog-whistle politics" através da análise de conteúdo temático. Os resultados mostram que há quatro temas que se destacam nessa retórica estratégica, que consistem em "defesa de Israel", "defesa da família tradicional", "patriotismo" e "liberdade de expressão". Este conjunto de temas reforça o apelo multivocal dos líderes religiosos e políticos, correspondendo à narrativa do nacionalismo cristão.

Using ten sermons from five prominent and politically active evangelical megachurch pastors taken from the 2016 presidential campaign season, this case study utilizes frame analysis to understand the political relevance of modern evangelical sermonizing. An inductive frame analysis allows the concept of a collective action frame to be observed as a process and for patterns to emerge from the source text. Within these sermons, ministers offer self-identifying evangelicals a vocabulary with which to understand and describe their own identity. In this context, the Bible is a powerful cultural symbol that represents an allegiance to traditions that are framed as the bedrock of American exceptionalism. The boundaries that are drawn and vociferously maintained in this sample emphasize exclusion over inclusion, especially in terms of salvation and righteousness, which can emotionally motivate action. In an election year, this sample demonstrates how evangelical identity is mobilized as an electoral force.