Is MAGA Apostate?

I was reading this article by Roger Olson questioning whether German Christians that supported Hitler committed apostasy and it stirred some things in my soul.

I believe in some way at least, they did…which leads me to examine again what is happening today.

Throughout history, the illicit mating of faith and politics has often led to profound theological issues. The support of Germans for Adolf Hitler during the Nazi regime and the backing of Donald Trump by many evangelical Christians in contemporary America present striking, albeit troubling, similarities. Both phenomena reveal the complex dynamics at play when religious belief intertwines with political ideology, often resulting in significant moral compromises. I want to discuss those parallels, particularly through the lens of the Donatist conflict in the early church, which delved into the difficult question of apostasy and the conditions for reconciliation within a community of faith.

In the early 20th century, a fragmented Germany faced the tumultuous aftermath of World War I and the economic despair of the Weimar Republic. Hitler’s rise to power was characterized by a promise to restore Germany’s national pride and stability, appealing to a populace desperate for hope and direction. The Protestant churches, in particular, became arenas where nationalism and religion fused, often leading to compromises on ethical standards in favor of political expedience.

Similarly, the election of Donald Trump in 2016 galvanized a significant section of the evangelical community, a demographic that perceived him as a bulwark against what they viewed as encroaching secularism and a cultural left that threatened their values. Many evangelicals supported Trump not primarily out of alignment with his character or personal morals, but rather for political outcomes they believed would safeguard their beliefs and advocate for their interests, as well as take down their “enemies”.

In both cases, individuals aligned with these leaders often rationalized their support through a lens of theological justification. For German Christians, the “German Christians” movement sought to align Nazi ideologies with a version of Christianity that stripped Jewish influence from the faith, thereby creating a form of nationalism imbued with religious significance. This distortion allowed believers to overlook the fundamentally un-Christian nature of Hitler’s racial policies.

In a parallel fashion, many evangelicals have framed their support for Trump as a necessary evil, arguing that pragmatic choices must be made for the greater good. This rationale echoes with a theological justification rooted in a belief that political power can be harnessed to enact divine purpose, often sidelining the need for personal integrity or ethical consistency.

The Donatist conflict of the early church provides a poignant backdrop to understand these dynamics. The Donatists argued that those who had lapsed in faith—by renouncing their beliefs under persecution—should not be allowed to return to the church. This conflict revolved around purity, loyalty, and the integrity of the church community. The key question was whether those who had failed in their commitment could be granted forgiveness and restored to fellowship, despite their betrayal of the church and its members.

This analogous situation emerges in both the German Christian movement and evangelical support for Trump. In the former, the church became complicit in state-sponsored policies despite considerable theological and ethical compromises. Many Christians turned a blind eye to Hitler’s atrocities, prioritizing national loyalty over spiritual integrity, akin to the Donatist rejection of compromised believers. In the contemporary evangelical context, supporters often grapple with the moral implications of Trump’s behavior and rhetoric, trying to justify their support while wrestling with accusations of apostasy. The central question remains: when is it justifiable to overlook moral failings of political leaders for the sake of perceived larger causes?

The support of Germans for Hitler and the backing of Trump by many evangelicals reveal the complex ways in which faith can be instrumentalized for political allegiance. Both scenarios involve sacrificial compromises of religious integrity in favor of broader, often nationalistic goals. The Donatist conflict serves as a historical reminder of the dilemmas churches face regarding faithfulness, moral integrity, and the question of who truly belongs within the community of believers. As society examines the interplay of politics and faith, these historical parallels challenge believers to critically assess their allegiances, urging a thoughtful engagement with both the moral imperatives of their faith and the political realities of their context.

The questions before the house are profound. If MAGA is a form of apostasy, then those involved must repent…and if they repent, how does the church, especially those Trump and MAGA have harmed…respond?

I’ll try to answer that in my next article…