The Daily - 'The Run-Up': The Guardrails

Episode Date: October 1, 2022

Why we can’t understand this moment in politics without first understanding the transformation of American evangelicalism.“The Run-Up” is a new politics podcast from The New York Times. Leading up to the 2022 midterms, we’ll be sharing the latest episode here every Saturday. If you want to hear episodes when they first drop on Thursdays, follow “The Run-Up” wherever you get your podcasts, including on Apple, Spotify, Google, Stitcher and Amazon Music.

Hey, it's Michael. Today, The Run-Up, our show about the midterm elections and how we got to this fraught moment in American politics. Last week, we looked at President Biden's midterms message, a message asking Americans to unite together to protect democracy, and how that message might be missing the reality that for an increasing number of Americans, democracy is no longer the foundation upon which this country is built. Today, in Episode 4, we look at what's motivating many of those voters instead. It is hard to put into words what exactly we witnessed today because we have not seen this before. It is hard to put into words what exactly we witnessed today because we've not seen this before. Thousands storming the Capitol after a rally with President Trump, during which he urged them to march on the Capitol.

There's a lot of unforgettable moments from January 6th. The crowded mob outside the Capitol. You Confederate flags. The calls to hang Mike Pence. The makeshift galas. Ladies and gentlemen, please welcome Pastor Paula White for today's prayer. But there was something else that was going on that day too. Good morning. This is a day the Lord had made. Come on, Washington. We will rejoice and be glad in it. Give God a shout of praise.

And once you start listening for it, it's everywhere. and be glad in it. Give God a shout of praise. And once you start listening for it, let us pray, it's everywhere. For as our president says, we worship God, not government. God bless you. Up on the stage. As you walk in with the Proud Boys

to the state capitol. Out in the streets. We're going to say a prayer. Relax, we're going to say a prayer. Amen. We've been breathing, we've been fighting, but now I want you to pray with me. Outside the Capitol. Jesus Christ, we invoke your name.

Amen. Amen. And inside the halls of government. Let's all say a prayer and let's say it in your face. Thank you, Heavenly Father, for blessing us with this opportunity. How insurrection became holy. And why we can't understand this moment in politics without first understanding the transformation of American evangelicalism.

From the New York Times, I'm Astead Herndon. This is The Run-Up. Everybody mask up, please. I'm going live, mask up. We love you and we thank you. In Christ's holy name we pray. Amen. I actually don't know anything about your religious upbringing.

Do you want to do... I was going to talk about mine, so I was interested in yours also. How did you get interested in religion reporting? Did you grow up religious? Yeah, I did. I did. I was raised in an evangelical household in a very evangelical community. So Orthodox Presbyterian Church and then Evangelical Presbyterian Church.

Evangelical K through 8. So just a very, very kind of what I would call mainstream white evangelicalism in the Midwest. Yeah. And you went to Wheaton. I did. Yeah. So I went to an evangelical college as well. My father taught at Wheaton.

Really? Yeah. Oh my gosh. When? What years? It was while I was in middle school. And he would teach like a class every now and then doing like black theology stuff at Wheaton. I mean, I should clarify, Wheaton is a Christian college in Illinois.

Yes. Yeah, exactly. So obviously, I'm a political reporter. But I'm a political reporter, but I'm also the son of a Christian pastor. And for the last couple years, my colleague Ruth Graham has been reporting on something hugely important that's been happening at the intersection

of faith and politics. Ruth, with that in mind, I feel like, out of all my colleagues here, you would appreciate this story about Trump that I remember back in 2016. Please welcome back to Liberty University, Mr. Donald Trump. When he was speaking at Liberty University. This is soap. You get those teleprompters out of here. We're going to have some fun, right? And it was during that presidential primary

peak period where people were trying to really court the evangelical vote. We're going to protect Christianity. And I can say that. I don't have to be politically correct. We're going to protect it, you know? And he talked about two Corinthians, right? Two Corinthians. Two Corinthians. We're the spirit of two Corinthians, right? Two Corinthians. Two Corinthians. Yeah. Where the spirit of the Lord, right? Please tell me you remember that moment. I do. Well, it was like an instant.

I mean, it was sort of hilarious to anyone who knows the Bible. Like it was a shocking moment. And it felt at the time maybe like, oh, this is the end. Like it shows that he hasn't, you know, not only not read the Bible, but like hasn't talked about it. Yeah, yeah. Could we slow this down? Like maybe people would not know why that moment is so ridiculous and kind of funny. Can you explain that?

Well, you would call it second Corinthians. Everyone. Everyone who has literally had any reference. Sunday school. Yes. If you've been to one Sunday school class, you know it's second Corinthians. Yeah. And I think there was a little bit.

I remember some like revisionist interpretations of that of people saying like, well, I call it two Corinthians, but like no like American evangelical. It just instantly just clangs in the ear in a way that just betrays a complete lack of fluency with even just, this is like ABCs of being a American evangelical or Christian. But it also, you know, it didn't stop people from falling in love with him. Right. Because I think we both know what happens next in terms of evangelicals getting behind or at least on board with Trump, particularly, you know,

prominent parts of evangelical leadership. And the thought was that they supported him because of what they understood that they could get out of a Trump presidency. Yes, absolutely. It was really transactional. And I think the fact that that moment didn't blow up and become any kind of impediment to his success just shows that, that he was kind of seen as like, not necessarily one of us, but a fighter on our behalf. And so, you know, saying two Corinthians doesn't get in the way of any of that. Right. In the end, two Corinthians is not as important as a federal judiciary that has a whole bunch of judges that back what evangelicals want, which is the overturning of Roe.

Yeah, that's exactly right. But alongside that transactional relationship, and the reason I wanted to talk to you, Ruth, is because I feel like your reporting really speaks to something else that's happening in the evangelical world during this same time, not necessarily among leadership, but at the grassroots level. And it may be something that's a little harder to pin down, but something I find even more important to understand. I wonder where you think we should start that story. Yeah. You know, first, if we look back to early 2020, I think you have a lot of evangelical pastors who were really caught off guard by the politicization of the pandemic. So, you know, a lot of those churches closed obediently and responsibly at the beginning

of the pandemic. And at first, that's all sort of going pretty smoothly. But as the pandemic goes on, people are, you know, they're listening to Fox. They're listening to these other media sources. They're coming back into the churches. They're complaining to their pastors about masking or encouraging masking. Are you going to require it? When are you going to reopen? How kind of vocally are you going to oppose your local government's requirements about reopening? So every single kind of church decision becomes really, really politically fraught for a lot of these pastors. At that same time, that's heading

into the summer of 2020. America has this, you know, big, sprawling racial justice conversation. There's George Floyd. And again, at the beginning of that, a lot of pastors and really a lot of white evangelical Christians are appalled by the George Floyd video. You know, they want to sit down and talk about it. You see a lot of, you know, there'll be like a round table in a small town or a black pastor sitting down with a white pastor. There was a lot of that for that period. There really was. There was kind of this like golden hour where it felt like everyone was like, yeah, let's talk about it.

And let's talk about it in church. Then, you know, as that summer is going on, again, you have conservative media kind of putting their thumbs on the scales in a certain way. You're having people start to see some of these protests as riots. And it's just like curdling. And suddenly, white evangelicals are not as on board with having these conversations. You know, hearing the phrase Black Lives Matter becomes really, really fraught. And meanwhile, of course, broadly speaking, you know, Christianity is declining in the U.S.

So you have a lot less people now going to church than were, you know, 10 years ago, 20 years ago, really even two and a half years ago because of the pandemic as a really precipitous drop-off. So you have these churches in an ongoing slow-motion crisis, and it's just a really difficult, long period for a lot of them. You're saying that there's been a pretty fundamental shift in how these churches function, pretty fundamental shift in how these churches function, where it used to be that parishioners were coming and receiving a set of values from the pulpit. What you seem to be describing now is churchgoers who increasingly identify with this sort of Trumpist worldview and are bringing that into the church with them and expecting church leadership to reflect

that back. Is that fair? Yeah, it really is. It's so parallel to what's happening in the Republican Party because it's the grassroots, like getting ahead of the leadership and then the leadership scrambling to either adapt, you know, keep up or be left behind. A theme, a plan, yeah. And churchgoers are consumers, you know, they get to choose left behind. A theme, a plan, yeah. And churchgoers are consumers, you know, they get to choose where they go and who they listen to. So they're the ones kind of driving the bus of American evangelicalism, I guess. Like, they're in charge. And when, so they went all in with Trump, the old kind of institutional leaders had to figure out how to keep up. So you have someone like Al Mohler, who I'm really interested in. He's a big Southern Baptist convention voice, kind of like a lion of

the denomination. He's the president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He opposes Trump in 2016, quite overtly, distinctly, he says it clearly. And then by 2020, he's come around. And then even since then, very recently, just within the last few weeks, you have him saying, you know, anyone who votes the wrong way is unfaithful to God. And so you can see him kind of following the people, following the grassroots rather than leading that conversation. So a lot of the church leaders have had to catch up to Trump because the members of the church were really already there. And it seems like this is particularly true in evangelicalism, where unlike, say, the Catholic Church, where the pope is dictating or there's a set structure that's top down, this is a denomination or a faith that's really a bottom-up driven thing anyway. Yeah, exactly. And then meanwhile, this whole new class

of like new voices, new leaders are coming in to fit in those leadership roles like more naturally than some of the old guard who's scrambling to keep up. I'm doing a special broadcast right now for those of you that have been praying for us and partnering with us. You have people like Lance Wall now who's, you know, he's a self-proclaimed prophet. He claims to have predicted Trump. Well, I think God is saying, you've got a responsibility to stand up. You have to think about saving your nation. This is Flashpoint. There are TV shows. There's Flashpoint on the Victory Channel. Flashpoint is here to bring you hope and faith, and we're going to do that tonight as well.

But first, you must see what's really happening in our world. The left talks all the time about the separation of church and state. In reality, the left wants a church that is subservient to the state. You know, there are all these characters that have massive social media followings. Christians say all the time, Charlie, I don't want to get involved in politics. I just care about the gospel. This is important. We've got a big Christian audience. What do you say? Let's get this straight, people. It's like, okay, you're not into politics. Are you still into morality? You've got your Bible.

There's this, you know, chaotic marketplace of voices. This is nothing but a ruse of the devil using race to get people emotionally stirred up for another agenda that is distinctly anti-Christian. another agenda that is distinctly anti-Christian. We cannot allow the political space to be the one sphere where Christ is not being felt and known and seen. We've been speaking about Donald Trump as a unique type of a leader who God put in and inserted into the American system. And they kind of bring in that sort of charismatic Pentecostal feel that like Trump and Trumpism has kind of been ordained by God.

I'm to the place right now, if you vote Democrat, I don't even want you around this church. You can get out, you demon. You can get out, you baby butchering election thief. You cannot be a Christian and vote Democrat in this nation. I don't care how mad that makes you. You get pissed off as you want. So they're not being, you know, to use Christianese, like being discipled primarily by the pastor.

We appreciate Christianese. But they're being discipled by new voices who are really reaching a lot of evangelicals. And you even have some groups now putting out lists of like churches to avoid. So there's this idea of like the woke church and that, you know, that's something that some of these activists are like warning people to be on the alert for, you know, red flags if your churches or your pastor is woke. So, you know, maybe your pastor didn't sufficiently celebrate the end of Roe v. Wade. That was something you saw a lot of talk about. Like, if that's not like a cause for full-throated celebration, then leave your church.

So it's almost like this alternate religious world that is growing up outside the church. And it's not even about the church. So, you know, for me, a big question as a religion reporter is like, how much of my reporting should even be, you know, in churches when I'm reporting on American Christianity? Like, is that where that's happening? Or is a place, you know, by the time you get to January 6th, is that almost a religious event in itself? And what do you mean by that? Well, there's this idea if you're a Christian that your faith shouldn't stay in church. You know, it may be sort of kindled and exist primarily in your own heart and your relationship with God, but you also have this obligation to take it outside the four walls of

the church and live out your faith in a way that impacts the world. You know, so I don't mean to be glib about it, but I think for some of the people there, and again, this is like not the majority of American Christians, but for some people there, you know, those are actions that flowed from their faith. And then, you know, you have some folks for whom it really became, especially over time, a really important and like galvanizing and empowering and exciting kind of story. So my colleague Elizabeth Dias has done a lot of reporting on this. You know, for a subset of people, even people who weren't there are like, you know, I wasn't there, but I wish I was. And in that group, there's something else really interesting that's happening. A lot of them are starting to identify with and almost reclaim this term that has been around for a while but hasn't been used this way. They're starting to

call themselves Christian nationalists. Can you lay out what that term actually means? Well, it depends who you talk to. I'm talking to you, though. You give us your definition. That's the only one that matters. Right. I mean, so you, though. You give us your definition. That's the only one that matters. Right. I mean, so fundamentally, you know, if you ask people who are claiming the term, it's this idea that America is a Christian nation. It was a country founded by Christians on Christian principles and still somehow, like, belongs to Christians. So that's a really important part of it, like that, you know, America is like our land as Christians and then the U.S. is like part of God's plan. And, you know, that now we're at this point where we need to sort of reassert that.

There's another, you know, related idea, the Seven Mountains Mandate, that Christians ought to be taking over these seven spheres of influence. So it's like government, arts, education, family, you know, there's like seven of these and Christians should be like claiming dominion over these spaces. Sometimes it's, you know, people will talk about like building a parallel society and that's when you see kind of like we need to be like taking over the school boards and kind of like making America ours, like retaking it. over the school boards and kind of like making America ours, like retaking it. And so it's really received as a slur in conservative evangelical communities. But more recently, you see people owning it and kind of, you know, reclaiming the term and being like, actually, yes,

I am a Christian nationalist. I have done extensive research on the Seven Mountains mandate by that I mean I just googled it five seconds ago because I was like I want to know all seven okay um it's seen and so it seems as if the seven areas that Christians should control family religion education media entertainment business and government I mean that's all of society i mean it feels like what i mean is it fair to say that this is one way of pretty much understanding what we sometimes in media call the culture war playing out in america right now it's really a battle over those seven sectors isn't it yeah it's exactly and it's this idea that, again, you know, Christians have a responsibility to sort of claim ownership over these spheres and over these areas. You know,

no more kind of pious shrinking back into the pews and just nurturing this faith in your own heart. This is about like a muscular Christianity, and we're going to take America back for their perception of Christian values. I mean, how does this movement fit into the larger evangelical wing? When we talk about Christian nationalists, are we talking about a sliver of the evangelical movement, or are they driving the evangelical conversation? I guess they could be doing both, too. Yeah, I don't know about a sliver. Maybe like it's a piece of the pie. You know, academics have their own way of looking at it.

Sam Perry and Andrew Whitehead, who have done a lot of writing and research on Christian nationalism in the last few years, they use these six questions drawn from the Baylor Religion Survey to put together this kind of scale of Christian nationalism. So, you know, it's these statements like, agree or disagree, the federal government should advocate Christian values. And people could say they strongly disagree, disagree, agree, strongly agree. And Perry and Whitehead divide people based on their answers into four categories, the rejecters of Christian nationalism, resistors, accommodators, and then you have this category of ambassadors who are the strongest supporters here. And it turns out that about 20% of Americans are ambassadors. Wait, so 20% of all Americans, according to this research,

would be categorized as ambassadors of Christian nationalism? Yes. Although, you know, I also think it's important to note that, you know, it doesn't mean 20% of Americans are like ready to storm the Capitol. You know, not all ambassadors are white, not all of them, you know, are on board with Trump. So we have to be careful with that number. But I still think it's a useful, rough guide for understanding how many Americans understand the relationship between America, American history, and Christianity in this way. Yeah, yeah. I mean, I appreciate you saying that because I feel like I feel both sides of that coin.

You know, I grew up with tons of people who would talk about America in an explicitly Christian way, talk about America as a country ordained by God, but would certainly not agree with the actions of the six and largely were Black Christians who didn't consider themselves Republicans at all. At the same time, I totally see how that research is helpful in terms of understanding for how many

people faith and America are really synonymous. Right. And I mean, you even have like white Republicans saying, wait a minute, I have the same conception of like my own faith, American history, patriotism that I had, you know, in the 80s and 90s. And now all of a sudden I'm being called, you know, a Christian nationalist, this terrifying term. But what's new here and what is really interesting, and it's a little hard to get numbers for, is you have some set of people here, including politicians and public figures, really starting to embrace this term. We need to be the party of nationalism. And I'm a Christian, and I say it proudly, we should be Christian nationalists. So you have Marjorie Taylor Greene

actually selling t-shirts saying, proud Christian nationalist. The church is supposed to direct the government. The government is not supposed to direct the church. You have Congresswoman Lauren Boebert. That is not how our founding fathers intended it. And I'm tired of this separation of church and state junk. Saying she's tired of the separation of church and state. We think about our elected officials in Pennsylvania who've been weak and feckless. Similar rhetoric from someone like Doug Mastriano, the Republican nominee for governor in Pennsylvania who've been weak and feckless. Similar rhetoric from someone like Doug Mastriano, the Republican nominee for governor in Pennsylvania.

This republic, I pray that we'll take responsibility, we'll seize the power that we had given to us by the Constitution and as well by you. Who again has, you know, called the separation of church and state a myth. So that's a new kind of Republican. It's a new kind of like Christian rhetoric in political spaces, which, you know, I think we're at the beginning of that. But it's a new kind of evangelical Christian politician.

How then should we see where all of this is headed? I mean, I'm thinking about the evolutions we've seen in the last couple of years. I'm thinking about the evolutions we've seen in the Trump era. the last couple years. I'm thinking about the evolutions we've seen in the Trump era. I'm thinking about historically where Christianity has at oftentimes been a key wedge in political conflict. Like, I'm asking you to prophesy. I can prophesy. I have my own, you know, prophesy. I'd have my own, you know, monetized show on YouTube. But like, you know, like, if it's a mission, if it's a duty, if it is a calling, how then should we think about like kind of where this is headed?

I think the answer to that depends on who wins these battles. Like, who are going to be the pastors 10 years from now? Who are going to be the institutional leaders? Who are going to be the most prominent kind of moral voices? And is it going to be people coming up from this kind of grassroots right now, from the kind of Trumpist wing of the church? Or is kind of the old mainstream evangelicalism going to be able to reassert itself? How many people will be going to church? I mean, all of these things are in such flux right now, and we just don't know the answers. And it's also going to depend on, like, are people like Doug Mastriano, I mean, is he going to win? And is that what most Republicans

want? Is that what most American Christians want? So I think we just, we don't know who's going to win these battles over time and who's going to kind of be able to tell the story of American Christianity. What do you think it means then for church to play, the formal church, to play less of a role in Americans' lives? the formal church, to play less of a role in Americans' lives, while this type of religion and faith is playing a greater role in politics? Yeah, well, I mean, we've been talking about this grassroots movement, right? And I think if you step back and look a little more broadly,

we're watching almost every institution in American life right now fragment and collapse and crumble and be reassembled in some zombie form. And, you know, to think about the church going through that, you know, for all the flaws of the American church, but given the role that church plays in people's lives, you know, when you talk about those guardrails falling off in this space, particularly when it comes to people's religions, their faith, that's how they understand the world, is the meaning and purpose of their own lives, their relationships, their, you know, beliefs about their eternal soul.

Like, it's really, really hard to overstate the impact of taking off the guardrails in that space. After talking with Ruth, I wanted to better understand all of this from within the world of the evangelical church. How are you? And so I reached out to the person Ruth mentioned. Friday, that should explain enough. A good Friday or a bad Friday, I don't mean to make... And so I reached out to the person Ruth mentioned. A good Friday or a bad Friday. Someone who, for years, represented the guardrails in church leadership. But now has followed the church into a new political direction.

Dr. Al Mohler. We'll be right back. Dr. Al Mohler has been an influential evangelical leader for decades. He's the president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, one of the largest seminaries in the world. the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, one of the largest seminaries in the world. And in that role, he's responsible for training future church leaders who are defining this next era of the evangelical church.

So he's maybe one of the best people to talk to, to understand the way in which church leadership has followed the grassroots. And when we talked, he told me that part of his own transformation is because of what he feels are the consequences of an increasingly secular world. Secularization, just sociologically defined, is the decline of the influence of religion, but in the case of the United States, of historic Christian theism in the culture. And so that means that the message preached by evangelical Christians and other Orthodox

communities of faith is more out of step with the direction of the culture than would have been the case in the 1950s. In the 1950s, the leadership of the Southern Baptist Convention and the leadership of the United States and Congress or corporate America or all this would have been seen as part of the same world. That's not so much the case now. I think we just have to say, honestly. Is that because of certain issues? I mean, I think we can infer, but I would like for us to be clear. I mean, you could take the issue of abortion. You could take the, I'll tell you the most explosive issue, undoubtedly is the sexuality issues, which even in the, this is my 30th year as president, but let's just say that entire alphabets have been developed that didn't exist in public conversation in 1993.

And so the context of conservative Christianity in America is that, quite frankly, on many of these moral issues, the society agreed with us. Now the society disagrees with us. That's a fundamental change. And that is driving what you say has changed the work and the role that you all play at the school that has created the urgency to train these pastors in this new way. Yeah, there's no doubt about that. And I think they sense that they have a different challenge in the cultural sense than their, say, grandfathers would have had. So is the basic premise that the Democratic Party's embrace of LGBTQ politics and embrace of those people and the embrace of pro-choice position has moved the party away from a position where you feel like

it can be compatible with your Christian faith? Oh, absolutely. I'm curious what you think of people like Congresswoman Lauren Boebert, who have said that they're tired of the separation of church and state, that church needs to play a greater explicit role in government. Is that something you would agree with? I wouldn't put it that way. And Representative Boebert has a different style than I have.

I don't like the language of separation of church and state because that's not constitutional language. So that's Thomas Jefferson language. I mean, the constitutional language is the language of the Constitution, which prohibits Congress to establish a religion and ensures the free exercise of religion. Those are two different things. And I do not want a Christian church in charge of the United States government. I do not want a religious test in charge of the United States government. I do not want a religious test for public office as administered by the government. Those things are clear in terms of our constitution. But I do believe that our republic is based upon certain religious assumptions, and without those assumptions, the entire project is very much undermined and

subverted. What are those assumptions? I think they're the assumptions of the inheritance of Christianity concerning human dignity, human rights. When you say all men are created equal, well, that implies a creator. Not only implies, it explicitly declares a creator. Where do those rights come from? So this isn't some kind of abstract discussion. I don't think a secular state is a neutral state. I wouldn't call for the end of the separation of church and state. I do not want an established church. I do believe that there is no such thing as a secular nation, and I don't believe that our constitutional compact can exist without the basic theological presuppositions that gave birth to the country. I mean, I have a couple images of the relationship between evangelical

Christianity and politics stuck in my mind over the last 10, 15 years. And I think one of them I cannot forget is the January 6th day, right, where you saw a lot of imagery, particularly of Christ and faith that people were using as justification to then attack the Capitol. I was curious, as someone who saw those same images, what did you think of them? I thought they were a freak show. I am a Christian theologian, and I do not want to see the symbols of Christianity co-opted by anyone. Some of the people there, no doubt, were well-intended in just trying to say we're claiming a Christian continuity with the American constitutional experiment. But I was not there on January the 6th, would not have been there

on January the 6th. And I want to be honest, I found much of it to be an absolute freak show, and so did just about all the Christians I know. Even if you personally disagreed, why do you think there was space for the ardent supporters of Donald Trump, a man you have expressed personal disagreements, but also endorsed politically? Why do you think there was an alignment between the symbols of your faith and his most violent supporters? between the symbols of your faith and his most violent supporters?

Well, I mean, I will simply say we don't have an evangelical Christian authority. We don't have any authority that says you get to show up with this. Anybody can show up right now in front of the White House today with any kind of symbol with no one's authorization. So I simply want to say that does not represent mainstream evangelical Christianity in the United States. With that view in mind, how do you feel about the term Christian nationalist? I have heard that come up in response to the six, and I've seen some statements where you have seen to go from disliking or disavowing that term to embracing it or at least embracing

parts of it. Is that fair? Yeah. I still don't like the term. What I said was people will throw that term against any conservative Christian who believes in the importance of nation and conservative political convictions and will claim you're a Christian nationalist if you believe Christianity should influence the nation. I said, I'm not going to run from that. But many in the media and certainly people on the left, they try to discredit Christian

influence by saying it's the radical right, it's the reactionary right, it's the Christian right. The latest thing is to say it's Christian nationalism. Well, unapologetically, I believe in the importance of nation. I mean, our constitutional order is around a nation. I want to defend this nation. But all throughout the 20th century, particularly, the word nationalist also includes, which I don't use. It's not on my business card. I've not described myself as a Christian nationalist because I don't associate with the extremes that show up on the right.

But you said you're not going to run from that term. You can't run from it. There are people who would say, I don't like Baptists. Well, I don't know which Baptist you don't like, but I'm a Baptist. I can't run from being a Baptist. I can try to argue with you what Baptist rightly means. But and state, why not disavow the term Christian nationalist? Because I'm not giving her the term. I'm not giving anybody that term. I'm not giving you the term. And I'm not arguing that you don't have the right to your definition, but there's no fixed definition there that demonstrates that what that must mean is oath keepers or, you know, some group that showed up on January the 6th. In other words, if I say abortion ought to be illegal and you say that's, I'm not saying you, excuse me,

but someone says that's Christian nationalism, I'm not going to say, well, then nevermind. I don't have a position on abortion. I'm not going to run away at that argument. You've recently talked about how it could be, quote, unfaithful to God to vote the wrong way. What did you mean by that? I think there's certain issues that have to have primacy for Christian voters in our context.

At that meeting, I was speaking to voters in Georgia, and I said two things in particular. I was very clear, the sanctity of human life and the integrity of marriage. And I said those would be the predominating issues for me. I think Christians must faithfully uphold those two principles. There's more to politics, but I'm arguing there's not less. So again, it's coming back to abortion and LGBTQ rights. LGBTQ rights in one sense is the way you're going to describe it. I'm going to say the most important thing is defending marriage. And, you know, the Supreme Court in their Burgerfell decision declared its judgment on the fact that no state may prevent nor fail to recognize what is defined as lawful same-sex marriage.

I understand that. I'm not holding a sign outside the county courthouse protesting that. I believe it's a mistake. I believe that it will weaken this entire society. society. And look, that issue right now is front and center precisely because not of the Supreme Court and not even because of a state measure, but because the United States Congress is taking up legislation that would codify the Obergefell decision. And yeah, I think if you find conservative Christians, you're going to find people who believe that will be a grave mistake. I understand that's your belief. I'm not actually trying to push on that belief. I am saying, you're saying the primacy of those two issues for you and what

you are articulating for Christians should come before other issues. Is that what I hear you saying? That is what I said. They're prior. I think they're both pre-political, by the way, which is Christian ethical language for this is prior to what should be the regime of politics. Okay. How should one measure those issues against, say, the peaceful transfer of power, right? Why isn't an issue like democracy just as important as abortion or gay marriage? Well, number one, I don't know that that is in the midterm elections right now a crucial issue. And it's not as defined candidate by candidate or even party by party right now. And by the way, if you look at the record of what I said

on January the 6th and subsequent to January the 6th, I called for and consistently have called for a peaceful transfer of power. Well, let me change the question to phrase it in actual candidates in this midterm elections. You have candidates who stand against abortion and I would say mirror some of your conservative values, but have also explicitly attacked the idea of democracy. I'm thinking of Kerry Lake in Arizona. I'm thinking of Doug Mastriano, who was at the Capitol on January 6th. Do you support those candidates? Yeah, this is where we have a two-tier situation, and I want to be intellectually honest. So if I were living in those jurisdictions, I'd face the question of voting for them. But I'm not running from your question.

I'm simply going to say that in both parties right now, in order to have a majority, there are going to be people with whom the majority in both parties disagree. But nonetheless, they're going to count me in the number. They're going to hope for a majority. So that is the difficulty. We're in a fallen world. I want to be an honest Christian. There are horribly difficult decisions to be made. Let's put it this way. I generally want in almost every case, well, in every case, excuse me, let me take away the conditional. I want in every case, the genuinely conservative candidate to win, the genuinely conservative candidate to win, who will uphold the issues that I believe are paramount. I forswear and give up the idea of a perfect candidate. That's the best way I know

to put it. Okay. So it sounds like you're saying you would support them if you were in those districts and you could vote in those races. Is that fair? If I were in districts or in a state or in a statewide or congressional district election, I had to choose between someone who supports life and someone who does not support life in the womb. I'm going to vote for the one who upholds the sanctity of human life. Is there something that a candidate who supports your vision on marriage and abortion could do that would stop you from voting for them? Yes, if I felt like they could not uphold the Constitution of the United States, I would not vote for them.

And being at the January 6th Capitol does not cross that line for you? No, you switch two things. You got to the Capitol, because my understanding of January 6th is that there were multiple gatherings. So let's put it this way. Anyone who showed up to invade the Capitol, I think would have a very hard time taking the oath of office to uphold the Constitution of the United States. Okay. What if they defended people who invaded the Capitol?

I do not feel competent or honest at this point to know exactly what that means. I will say this. That oath of office is the precious foundation of the political compact. And I would not vote for anyone that I believe could not honestly and earnestly take the oath of office. But, you know, quite frankly, I am in no position to think I know of a major candidate that today would fit that description. For something like the midterm elections, what do you charge Christians to do this November? Well, I've spoken to that. Christians in the United States who have the ability to vote will vote one way or another. Even not voting is no abdication because you just strengthen and weight the vote of those who do vote. There's no refuge from political responsibility

here. I would say we need to be good stewards of the vote. And that means we got to know in our minds what is first and primary, and that's going to be the sanctity of every single human life. And what leads to the strengthening of marriage and the families, the basic building blocks of civilization. So you're saying even for you as a voter, you have set all of those other things aside for those two issues. And you're saying that in the charge for Christians this November, it sounds like you're saying that they should do the same thing. Yeah, I know you're not trying to misrepresent what I said. I'm not. I'm not. I thought that was a fair representation of what you said.

I did not say set them aside. Okay. I said it's a matter of priority. Okay. Deprioritize. Yeah, no, that's fair. So all of me shows up all the time. I am saying clearly, honestly, it is an issue of secondary or tertiary priority to me. If the abortion issue were settled in favor of the sanctity of human life, I'd look forward to some great debates on some other issues. But right now, and look, I'm not alone in this. The left is making the same argument. I mean, some of the loudest discussion on abortion right now, I'm not coming from the right, it's coming from the left. And look, I'm not alone in this. The left is making the same argument. I mean, some of the loudest discussion on abortion right now, not coming from the right, is coming from the left. And look, there are an awful lot of Democrats who I think would are honestly saying the

most important thing you can vote on is abortion rights. So in other words, I don't think we misunderstand one another in this cultural conflict. Is it fair then to see what you're doing at the seminary and in your preaching as preparing pastors across the country for what you see as these core American fights, in addition to theologically, but culturally? You know, I will have to say, again, when I said I'm not running from things, I'm not running from the fact that I'm concerned about that. I am. My first responsibility is to make sure they know the difference between Genesis and First Kings,

is to train them how to teach and preach the word of God, to make sure that they know the doctrines of the Christian faith. But it's hard for me to hear that, though. I got to say, it's hard for me to hear that when you you have backed someone who didn't know Second Corinthians from two Corinthians. Right. How do we square those two things? Well, that was clever, by the way. That was a good job. I'm just being honest. I'm just being for real. Yeah, but I'm being for real.

I'm training pastors, first and foremost. I'm not training presidents. I don't think I am. I'm not training pastors. You are influencing president choices? You don't see yourself as doing that? No, I didn't say that. In this school, I am training preachers.

I thought that's what you asked me about. I'm training preachers. I don't primarily talk to them about politics. You come here, and I invite you to come here. You're going to find classes, New Testament, Old Testament, systematic theology, apologetics theology. And that is what I live in. I am more concerned about the city of God than the city of man. But because I love God, I'm also concerned about the city of man. So yes, I do lean into those issues. And look,

they're the ones that interest the New York Times. The New York Times doesn't want to come and ask me for an articulation of substitutionary atonement versus other theories of Christ's atonement. That is where I spend actually most of my time. What's your bet for the future of the country? I mean, you seem to be describing like really existential terms, a country that's moving further and further away from your vision of Christianity, an embrace of an urgent kind of political moment on national politics and in this midterms. A lot seems to be intersecting

in this time. Tell me what you think the future looks like. Well, I think you'll hear the biblical refrain when I say I'm neither the prophet nor the son of a prophet. But what I do know is this, I do believe we're down to issues of deep and daunting division in the United States. And I think everybody senses this, who's observing what's going on in the country. You could talk about red versus blue America. You could talk about urban versus rural America. You could look at any number of ways to describe it. Look, I have hope for this country. I still believe that it is one of the most enduring constitutional orders, indeed, in terms of written constitution, still the most enduring constitutional order. I don't believe it can exist if it's cut off from

its foundation, but I don't believe the vast majority of Americans have any intention to cut it off from its foundation. I think we're going to have to work through some of these issues. I don't think there are any assurances. God never promises the United States of America that it will survive, but I'm going to work for it. And look, I'm glad to have had this conversation on the podcast today. I just hope it was helpful. Dr. Mueller, I really appreciate your time. Thank you. Honored to be a part of it. God bless you. Thank you.

What Mueller makes clear is that in these midterm elections, he's faced with a different version of the compromise evangelical leaders made in 2016. The transaction has changed. It's no longer about one candidate who doesn't hold evangelical values but may help overturn Roe. It's now about a whole slew of candidates who, while they may be more religious, are also campaigning on election conspiracies,

attacking democracy, and going further on the idea that government should be in service of Christianity. Next time on The Runner. In 1996, Ralph Reed, who was the executive director of the Christian Coalition, said, I'd rather have a thousand school board members than the president of the United States. And I'm starting to see why. How grassroots conservatives have already

been winning key battles on a level Democrats have often ignored. I'm embarrassed to be a student at Grapevine High School because of the bills that you have passed. Hyper local racist. Grow up and fix your behavior. This is shocking. The Run-Up is reported by me, Astead Herndon, and produced by Elisa Gutierrez and Caitlin O'Keefe. It's edited by Franny Carr-Toth, Larissa Anderson, and Lisa Tobin,

with original music by Dan Powell, Marion Lozano, and Alisha Ba'i-Tube. It was mixed by Corey Schreppel and fact-checked by Caitlin Love. Special thanks to Paula Schumann, Sam Dolnick, David Haufinger, Julia Simon, Mahima Chablani, Shannon Busta, Nell Gologly, Jeffrey Miranda, and Maddie Maciela. Thanks so much for listening, y'all.