It took only seconds: How JD Vance exposed the convenient theology of progressive Christians

Vice President JD Vance is effortlessly exposing the double standard that progressive Christians use when critiquing American leaders.

It began with a Fox News interview in which Vance, a committed Catholic, told Sean Hannity about an “old-school, very Christian concept” while discussing immigration.

“You love your family, then you love your neighbor, then you love your community, then you love your fellow citizens in your own country, and then after that, you can focus and prioritize the rest of the world,” Vance explained. “A lot of the far left has completely inverted that. They seem to hate the citizens of their own country and care more about people outside their own borders. That is no way to run a society.”

It’s true.

Throughout history, Christians have taught and re-enforced the moral proximity principle —
otherwise known as ordo amoris — that Vance articulated.

Augustine
wrote about it. Thomas Aquinas extrapolated it. Protestant theologians like John Calvin and Herman Bavinck taught it. Even C.S. Lewis wrote about it. And, of course, scripture supports it.

It’s not novel. It’s common sense.

While loving your “neighbor” does not necessarily exclude anyone, we possess limited capacity and finite resources in which we can demonstrate love for our neighbors. Because we live in closest proximity to our family, neighbors, and friends (i.e., our community), it makes sense that they receive the lion’s share of our neighborly love.

On the other hand, if we distribute our love to those in a far-away land, we do so to the detriment of those closest to us.

Yes, Jesus’ parable of the good Samaritan teaches a powerful truth about
who is our neighbor. In that parable, the man who appeared to be dead was the neighbor of the priest and the Levite because of his proximity to them. Jesus teaches that the priest and the Levite had a responsibility to love and care for the man who appeared dead (Leviticus 19:18; cf. Deuteronomy 21:23), an obligation that in that moment superseded their obligation to priestly matters (Leviticus 21:1-3; cf. Ezekiel 44:25).

And yet, a barrage of Christians denounced Vance and accused him of promoting anti-Christian views.

Here are a few examples:

• “Actually, no,” claimed Jesuit priest James Martin.
• “I am a theologian trained at one of America’s top conservative evangelical theological seminaries.
  This is *not* a Christian concept; it’s a western individualistic one,”
  said Joash Thomas.
• “It’s important to point out that this is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what Jesus teaches,” claimed progressive pastor Zach Lambert.
• “This may be an ‘ol school’ concept. But it’s not ‘a very Christian concept,'” claimed pastor Thabiti Anyabwile.
• “Nowhere in the New Testament do we find this idea. Team Trump are rewriting Christianity,” claimed professor Philip Goff.

What is most interesting about the reaction to Vance’s comments is the discourse about Christianity in the public square, which has gone from “Christian nationalism is a threat to American democracy” to “this is what the Bible actually says” at lightning speed.

Another such example is Episcopal Bishop Mariann Budde’s pontificating to President Donald Trump about “mercy.”

Where were these Christians when Joe Biden was president just weeks ago? Why weren’t they speaking “truth to power” when a Democrat — who, in fact, is Catholic — was in office?

How is demanding that American society adopt radically anti-Christian policies, such as unrestricted abortion and trans ideology, consistent with the Bible or church tradition and teaching, let alone what Jesus himself taught? This is what the Biden administration did, and yet these prophetic voices speaking truth to power were silent.

Catholic professor Edward Feser perfectly highlighted this double standard:

If the gnashing of teeth from some corners of Christianity feels selective, that’s because it is.

For nearly a decade, Christian supporters of Trump and the MAGA movement have been smeared as Christian nationalists, despite data showing that progressive Christians — not conservative Christians — are the most politically active.

So what is exactly happening here?

I think Christian professor Owen Anderson perfectly diagnoses this phenomenon.

According to Anderson, progressive Christians who throw around accusations of “Christian nationalism” as an epithet really are seeking “to impose their theological vision through the machinery of the state.”

“They conflate the moral imperatives of the church with the distinct responsibilities of the government, effectively turning the state into an enforcer of their version of Christian compassion,” Anderson explains. “This confusion does a disservice to both the church and the state.”

In other words, progressive Christians are silent when a Democrat holds power because they agree with their policies. But they rediscover their ability to speak “truth to power” when Republicans hold power and enact policies they disagree with.

The irony is undeniable.

Progressive Christians are quick to accuse conservatives of politicizing their faith — even accusing them of making politics an idol. Now, progressives expose their own habit of wielding theology as a political weapon, making them guilty of the exact sin they preach against.

We should be thankful, meanwhile, that we have a leader in Vance who mainstreams classic Christian teaching.