Thanks for sharing the article, Paul. I'll chime in with some observations:

First, I won't speak for Wolfe. Haven't read his book and probably won't. And of what I know about him he would probably diverge with aspects of what I write below seeing as he doesn't seem to like neo-Calvinists much. But all of this underscores my first point which is that there are many views within what detractors have pajoritively labeled "Christian Nationalism". The article calls it Wolfe's movement. It isn't. He is just riding the wave. I welcome his contribution to the conversation but he is by no means THE mouthpiece for it.

I'll also add that CN will be used against any faithful Christian who cares about their nation. Here is a great article by Wilson on why we really shouldn't be bothered by this:

https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/s7-engaging-the-culture/christian-nationalism-the-movie.html

Anyway...

I think this is where Kuyperian sphere sovereignty is instructive. God made three governments (+1). — the civil magistrate, the family, the church, +the individual. Each has its distinct roles and duties and each can draw its origin back to Genisis 1-2.

The Gospel is very explicit that God raises up rulers and gave the civil magistrate the authority and duty to be the sword of justice. This means the ability to use lethal force. It is meant to be aimed at the wrongdoer which is why civil dissobediance to tyrants and unjust laws is also the duty of free and righteous men. That isn't a distinctly Christian Anarchist view.

All law is moral. It is one of those *not whether but which* issues. It is not whether the State will enforce morals and values but which ones it will enforce. It is not idolatry, or statist, or unbiblical for the Christian/Church to call the magistrate to account and call them to conduct themselves in a righteous and biblical manner. A good example of this was MacArthur's open letter to Gov. Newsom back in 2022. It IS unbiblical for the Church to assume responsibility if wielding the sword and using the State merely as a means to bludgeon its enemies (which isn't, to my knowledge, what Wolfe is arguing).

History is messy and the article rightly points out the issues with periods of history where the Church usurped the magistrate's authority. A good example of what not to do but not a good argument against laboring towards a Christian nation whose laws flow from biblical morality.

If Christian Anarchism *rejects the state* it is a biblically erroneous view. If it rejects *statism* than this article should have focused it's efforts at calling Christians to do the same, whether in the ditch of certain forms of CN or the opposite ditch of secular/pagan statism (where we find ourselves now). If repudiating statism is the defining characteristic of CA than it hardly needs to be a label at all, but I don't want to strawman and am happy to be pointed to a more robust explanation of CA.

The article states "In the Gospels, the devil tempts Jesus by offering him all political authority on earth, which he turns down."

This isn't correct. Jesus did not turn down political authority on earth, he turned down the means by which it was being offered because it centered on worship and obedience. He was obedient to the Father and now that he has been raised to glory, he HAS authority over all the nations and IS subduing them.

The article states the rallying cry of CA to be "no king but Christ". Yes and amen. To finish my thoughts with Kuyper again: "there is not a square inch in the whole domain of our human existence over which Christ, who is Sovereign over all, does not cry 'Mine!'"

This goes for nation-states, laws, courts, and cultural customs.