Which Christians really support Donald Trump?
A thought-provoking essay elicits a frustrated, data-backed response
It’s perhaps the most asked question in religion and politics, dating back to the 2016 presidential primaries and election: Which Christians propelled Donald Trump to victory?
As has been the case for several elections in a row, the general answer was “white evangelical Christians.” But among Trump’s Christian critics, the answer has tended be more qualified: “Actually, it’s those who don’t regularly attend church.” After all, the logic goes, there’s no way that regular attenders—and, by implication, the more faithful—would favor Trump over more palatable and traditional Republicans in the primary process, like Marco Rubio or Ted Cruz. Sure, they may have held their noses and voted for Trump over Clinton. But that’s not the same thing as support, is it?
A recent essay from historian Daniel K. Williams tackles this question yet again, although in a slightly different way. Williams is interested in the relationship between church attendance and Christian nationalism (CN).1 He highlights data that shows CN is more common among people who don’t attend church: “A PRRI survey published earlier this year showed that only 54 percent of Christian nationalists—and just 42 percent of those who are “sympathizers” with the ideology—attend church regularly.”
If this is right, Williams points out, then the growth and prevalence of CN is likely to be independent from religious demographics in the years ahead. “Even as church attendance declines,” Williams writes, “Christian nationalism is likely to remain alive and well.” He also cites data from a new book showing that “dechurched” evangelicals are likely to remain conservative across a range of issues. One reason for this, Williams concludes, has to do with what community dechurched Americans belong to: “Without a church community, in many cases, the nation’s political system becomes their church—and the results are polarizing.”
Even though Williams is expanding the conversation to CN and larger questions about the health of the American body politic, his diagnosis is quite similar to David French’s regarding Christian support for Trump: Increasingly, unchurched or dechurched evangelical Christians “find their band of brothers and sisters in the Trump movement.”
But political scientist Paul Djupe doesn’t buy it. In a rebuttal to Williams’ essay and the larger “zombie thesis”—that is, that unchurched Christian Trump voters are to blame for everything wrong in American politics—Djupe does three things. First, he shows that there just aren’t that many folks ranking high on traditional CN scales who don’t attend church; in fact, most high-ranking CNs attend at least several times per month.
Second, Djupe shows that CNs consistently exhibit high levels of warmth towards Donald Trump regardless of church attendance; “It’s clear from the evidence that Christian nationalism is linked to greater warmth toward Trump,” he writes, “and attendance doesn’t make a bit of difference.”
But most importantly, Djupe takes aim at the central element of Williams’ essay, that church attendance can ameliorate the polarization and partisan fury among the unchurched. Consider the following key paragraph in Djupe’s response (emphasis added):
The crux of Williams’ argument is that church attenders will temper their attitudes because of the important relationships they have with diverse sets of people. Outside of that context and they will treat their attitudes as God—politics as the new church— and damn the consequences for others. So that’s why it’s interesting that church attending Christian nationalists are more likely to agree with two “need for chaos” statements: “When I think about our political and social institutions, I cannot help thinking ‘just let them all burn.’” and “I fantasize about a natural disaster wiping out most of humanity so a small group of people can start all over.” Low attenders show only half the increase in support for chaos as their Christian nationalism climbs (~.06 points vs .11 points on a 0-1 scale). Put another way, church attendance boosts the relationship between Christian nationalism and chaos. Almost needless to say that it is the antithesis of concern for the community when you are ready to burn it down.
I love this sort of dialogue, primarily because it shows the complexity inherent in what at first glance seem to be easy questions. It also highlights the importance of creative and innovative research on these questions now and in the years ahead, especially as church attendance continues to decline.
For Christians concerned about the state of American politics and declining levels of trust in our governing institutions, it is simple (and comforting) to suggest church attendance could be a silver bullet to what ails us. But when the data just doesn’t back this up, we have to be comfortable engaging in more difficult and challenging conversations.
This term has gotten so much attention and airtime over the years that I’ve actually grown wary using it in my own teaching and research. In fact, I’d wager it has even become a bit of a Rorschach test, for supporters and opponents alike.