Here is something I write on nominalism:
One of the loudest objections to Christian nationalism is that it produces nominalism. Critics argue that if a nation outwardly acknowledges Christ—if its leaders publicly confess Him, enforce just laws, and promote Christianity—this will flood society and the church with hypocrites. And in their minds, hypocrites are worse than pagans.
But let’s examine this.
First, no Christian nationalist is saying civil government can regenerate hearts. Only the Holy Spirit does that. Civil magistrates aren’t tasked with converting souls; they’re tasked with upholding justice, punishing evil, and ruling in submission to Christ. That duty doesn’t disappear just because some people might fake it.
Second, Scripture acknowledges the reality of feigned obedience. Psalm 66 praises God because even His enemies bow before Him. Nominalism, in that sense, is not a refutation of truth—it’s a twisted confirmation of it. When the wicked pretend to be righteous, it reveals that righteousness still carries weight. No one pretends to worship a powerless god.
That said, to be clear: hypocrisy is a sin. It deserves judgment. The church must reject it. But the existence of hypocrisy in the public square can still be a providential benefit to the elect.
Here’s what I mean: in a society where Christ is honored—where laws reflect God’s standards, where churches can operate freely, where the gospel can be preached without fear—the elect thrive. Even if some pretend, the truth is still declared. Even if many are false, the true sheep still hear the Shepherd’s voice.
Look at history. Constantine’s conversion brought peace to the church. Did it introduce nominalism? Yes. But it also ended mass persecution. It opened the door for public preaching, theological councils, and missions. The gospel spread because of it, not in spite of it.
The same is true of Christendom more broadly. Even Roman Catholic nations preserved the name of Christ. And from those imperfect structures, the Reformation was born. The gospel advanced under monarchs who barely grasped it. God used them anyway.
Even in modern times, the Bible Belt—flawed as it was—produced more actual Christians than any other region of the country. Russell Moore despised it. He cheers for it to fade. But that region gave us churches on every corner, Bibles in every home, and Sunday schools that taught millions of children the Word of God. It wasn’t perfect. But it was better than drag queen libraries and rainbow month at the DMV.
Nominalism is not ideal. But what’s the alternative? A secular state that makes Christ irrelevant? A society where Christian speech is hate speech? You’re not eliminating hypocrisy. You’re replacing it with outright rebellion.
Now, let’s make a distinction. The Church must exercise discipline. She should strive for purity. We shouldn’t purposely seek nominalism but we can’t let the fear of it drive us away from obedience in the realm either. But nominalism in society—where the magistrate enforces Christian norms even if not everyone believes—is tolerable and even beneficial. It creates the space for the church to preach, for the elect to hear, for children to grow up with truth in their ears rather than lies.
Some pursue a kind of hyper-purity in reaction to this. Baptists often long for persecution because they think it purifies the church. Some Presbyterians do it too. Always reforming, always fracturing, always trying to perfect the remnant—until there’s nothing left but a blog and a bitter man. The Puritans themselves fell into this trap. They constantly picked at things. And what happened? Their descendants abandoned the faith, and their towns became dens of apostasy.
The lesson is this: purity and presence are not enemies. We want both. We want a faithful church and a faithful nation. We want truth preached in the pulpit and honored in the courts. Yes, some will feign. But many will believe.
Besides we are to be obedient regardless of the results.