Christian Nationalism and Politics in Ghana

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Reviewers Comments – National Christianity 

{All of Ghana’s post-independent leaders have been Christians who frequently referred to their faith in power (Asamoah-Gyadu 2014)} = This could be rephrased to acknowledge the controversies/complexities that existed in the cases of

1.     1.  Nkrumah championing an education of African Heritage and culture, discouraging the formation of political groups, and public institutions based on specific religious ideologies, etc.

2.   2. Jerry John Rawlings was not in favour of the New Christian wave (especially the prosperity gospel) and thus relied rather on the neo=African traditional religion (Afrikania mission as the media wing during his revolution)

3.      3. Dr Hilla Liman was a president of Ghana whose religious affiliation is not clear

I am of the view that even if all of Ghana’s post-independent presidents are Christians, not all of them referred to the Christian faith (in the sense of dominance). They have and are still using religion for political gains. That is a distinct issue/problem from Christian Nationalism. Remember, the anti-LGBTQ agenda gains support from other non-Christian religions in Ghana.  Rather, the bold reference to the Christian faith by Presidents (in total disregard to religious pluralism and ‘African heritage’ is quite recent – starting with Attah Mills (he even stopped the pouring of libation during independence day celebrations)

“In response, the church hierarchies joined forces to attempt to prevent what they saw as a concerted attack on religion.” An attack on Christianity is also seen as an attack on religion. However, attacks on other religions, to Christians, will not be considered an attack on religion.

“In Ghana, dominion theology has been systematically developed and articulated as such, but it generally describes a Pentecostal religious paradigm shift in terms of what it means to be a believer in contemporary contexts, including increased Christian influence over the public sphere.” Page 7.  Dominion theology has NOT…

The author could improve the work by clearly pointing out the problems of Christian Nationalism, especially drawing examples from other forms of religious nationalism and times when even Ghana Christians condemn such ideologies.

Christian Nationalism as a time bomb (intolerance, insecurity, religious conflicts, dominance etc) could be highlighted towards the conclusion.  

Very good and easy to understand. Meet academic writing standards save very minor typos

Author Response

Reviewer 1

Reviewers Comments – National Christianity 

{All of Ghana’s post-independent leaders have been Christians who frequently referred to their faith in power (Asamoah-Gyadu 2014)} = This could be rephrased to acknowledge the controversies/complexities that existed in the cases of

1.    1.  Nkrumah championing an education of African Heritage and culture, discouraging the formation of political groups, and public institutions based on specific religious ideologies, etc.
2.  2. Jerry John Rawlings was not in favour of the New Christian wave (especially the prosperity gospel) and thus relied rather on the neo=African traditional religion (Afrikania mission as the media wing during his revolution)
3.     3. Dr Hilla Liman was a president of Ghana whose religious affiliation is not clear

THANKS FOR THIS VALUABLE COMMENT. I HAVE AMENDED THE TEXT TO REFLECT THESE POINTS (PLEASE SEE IN TRACK CHANGES)

I am of the view that even if all of Ghana’s post-independent presidents are Christians, not all of them referred to the Christian faith (in the sense of dominance). They have and are still using religion for political gains. That is a distinct issue/problem from Christian Nationalism. Remember, the anti-LGBTQ agenda gains support from other non-Christian religions in Ghana.  Rather, the bold reference to the Christian faith by Presidents (in total disregard to religious pluralism and ‘African heritage’ is quite recent – starting with Attah Mills (he even stopped the pouring of libation during independence day celebrations)

“In response, the church hierarchies joined forces to attempt to prevent what they saw as a concerted attack on religion.” An attack on Christianity is also seen as an attack on religion. However, attacks on other religions, to Christians, will not be considered an attack on religion.

THANKS FOR THESE VALUABLE COMMENTS. I HAVE AMENDED THE TEXT TO REFLECT THESE POINTS (PLEASE SEE IN TRACK CHANGES)

“In Ghana, dominion theology has been systematically developed and articulated as such, but it generally describes a Pentecostal religious paradigm shift in terms of what it means to be a believer in contemporary contexts, including increased Christian influence over the public sphere.” Page 7.  Dominion theology has NOT…

'NOT' NOW INSERTED

The author could improve the work by clearly pointing out the problems of Christian Nationalism, especially drawing examples from other forms of religious nationalism and times when even Ghana Christians condemn such ideologies.

Christian Nationalism as a time bomb (intolerance, insecurity, religious conflicts, dominance etc) could be highlighted towards the conclusion. 

THANKS FOR THESE VALUABLE COMMENTS. HOWEVER, I HAVE NOT AMENDED THE TEXT TO REFLECT THESE POINTS AS THE ARTICLE IS ALREADY APPROACHING 13,000 WORDS AND TO ADD DISCUSSIONS ON THESE IMPORTANT POINTS WOULD, IN MY VIEW, NECESSITATE A (MUCH) LENGTHIER ARTICLE, ARGUABLY WITH A SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT FOCUS.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Very good and easy to understand. Meet academic writing standards save very minor typos

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and suggestions attached as a separate document.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

This carefully prepared manuscript, which I read with great interest, sets out to analyse the rise of Christian nationalism in the West African state of Ghana. I see this as an important and thought- provoking piece, but I do think that the author should clarify and develop certain aspects of his argument. My criticism is divided into three parts, which all revolve around the central concept of Christian nationalism:

1) The first question that requires clarification is whether Christian nationalism is purely an

analytical concept or whether it is also an ‘emic term’ in Ghanaian political culture. As an

analytical term, it is appropriately defined and also problematized in the introductory section

(pp. 1–3) of the manuscript. What remains uncertain, however, is whether members of

Ghanaian public would accept this term and use it. Having studied Ghana for almost 30

years I do certainly recognize the phenomenon that the manuscript describes and analyses,

but I have never heard Ghanaians discuss it as ‘Christian nationalism’. Yet, there are

passages in the manuscript that (at least indirectly) suggest that this is in fact the case. For

instance, on p. 3 it is stated that “[t]he result of this research was to confirm that many

Ghanaians, both religious and less religious, regard Christian nationalism as an ideology

which is gaining prominence in Ghana…”

I addition to my own experiences, the ‘foreignness’ of the term is detectable in the author’s

interview questions listed on p. 17. The term Christian nationalism is not mentioned in any

of the questions let alone that the interlocutors would be asked directly to comment on it.

Obviously, I cannot know why the author chose to avoid the term when formulating the

questions (there could be many good reasons for it), but my own assumption is that since

Christian nationalism is not a stable in Ghanaian political vocabulary it is not very

applicable for stimulating a conversation in the interview context (“What do you think of

Christian nationalism?” vs. “What do you think of Nkrumaism?”).

Even though I have some reservations about using the term Christian nationalism, I am not

trying to rule it out completely. I think the first qualification for using it is to tell the readers

whose term it actually is.

The author’s research background is in religion and politics, including in relation to Africa, as well as the politics of Ghana. The author recently published a research monograph on politics and political change in Ghana. Launching the book in Accra in April 2023, the author took the opportunity to speak to various people about the issue of Christian nationalism in Ghana. None were unaware of the term, and many had opinions about it. This is not of course to imply that everyone agreed precisely the meaning of the term, although of the people to whom the author spoke saw an increasing ‘Christianisation’ of Ghana’s politics, consistent with the burgeoning of new Pentecostal/Charismatic churches. In addition, many interviewees mentioned the influence of American-style ‘born again’ preachers and churches in Ghana, regarding this as another driver of Christian nationalism. Finally, many expressed a concern that the phenomenon of Christian nationalism was undermining Ghana’s constitutionally secular position.

 

There have also been several opinion pieces in the Ghanaian press or on blogs on the topic of Christian nationalism, written by Ghanaians and others, both for a Ghanaian and an international audience. See for example: ‘The battle is the Lord’s: Christian nationalism and the fight for gender and sexual justice’(https://uncpressblog.com/2021/11/02/the-battle-is-the-lords-christian-nationalism-and-the-fight-for-gender-and-sexual-justice/); Building of National Cathedral and how US Christian Nationalism is creeping into Ghana, Ghana Business News, 23 May 2023 (https://www.ghanabusinessnews.com/2023/05/16/building-of-national-cathedral-and-how-us-christian-nationalism-is-creeping-into-ghana/).

 

Regarding the author’s interview questions, the term Christian nationalism was not used in the questions which the author provided to interviewees before interviews. The term Christian nationalism is controversial and the author deemed it appropriate to begin the interview and bring the topic into the conversation at an appropriate time, often in the context of inter-faith relations, the national cathedral and/or national values.

 

2) Following from the above, coining a new term to designate a familiar phenomenon risks

creating a false impression of ‘uncharted territory’. Accrordingly, in the beginning of the

methodology section on p. 3 it is maintained that “[l]ittle scholarly attention has so far been

accorded to Christian nationalism in Ghana”. I would assert that there is a significant

amount of scholarly literature that has discussed the same phenomena – it simply has not

done it under the conceptual umbrella of Christian nationalism. The prominent scholars in

this field include, for example, Paul Gifford, Birgit Meyer, Marleen De Witte, and J.

Kwabena Asamoah-Gyadu, some of which are actually referenced in the text. Consequently,

the author’s argument would be more convincing if he would discuss more extensively what

the Christian nationalism perspective that he has adopted adds to the existing scholarship.

The author interviewed Kwabena Asamoah-Gyadu while in Ghana in April 2023 and had subsequent discussions with him via WhatsApp, discussing inter alia the issue of Christian nationalism with him. Earlier, Asamoah-Gyadu requested several papers from the author as he prepared for a lecture series on religion and politics in Ghana at the Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences in February 2023. Asamoah-Gyadu regards Christian nationalism as a phenomenon primarily connected to the influence of the new Pentecostal/Charismatic churches and recognises that Christian nationalism is changing the existing relationship between religion and politics in Ghana, making the former even more significant in relation to the latter.

The author emailed both Paul Gifford and Birgit Meyer about Christian nationalism. The former did not respond to that specific question and the latter did not reply to the email. The author also communicated by email with Marlene De Witte. This is her reply on 4 April 2023: ‘Yes, I follow the controversy around Christian nationalism in Ghana, in in particular the National Cathedral project, with interest, although I must say that I have not studied any details. From my expertise in the relationships between Christianity and African indigenous religions I would say that Ghana’s Christian nationalism is particularly detrimental for (adherents/practitioners of) indigenous religions. The Christian diabolisation of African indigenous religions is of course nothing new and takes many forms (ranging from the more intellectualist analyses of it by Otabil to outright physical attacks on shrines), but I do think we are seeing a new chapter in Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity’s increasing influence on (or infiltration in?) the Ghanaian state and national institutions. The current administration’s open promotion of Christianity over other, non-Christian religions, and its ‘branding’ of Ghana as a Christian nation, is a further endorsement of a very general and widespread negative attitude towards African indigenous religions and their practitioners. The influence and support of evangelical Christian nationalists in the US seems indeed an important dimension to consider here, as well as the successful marriage between this type of Christianity and neo-liberal capitalism (which I touched upon in a recent publication).’

The author also emailed a US-based Ghanaian academic, Kwame Otu, who has written about Christian nationalism in Ghana in relation to LGBTQ+ issues. This is his reply to the author’s question about Christian nationalism: ‘Many thanks for your email and the blog post on Christian nationalism and Democracy. To respond to your prompt: Christian nationalism in Ghana is not new. It has just resurged in a manner never before seen and in a different guise. The increased visibility of LGBT+ human rights politics, the progressive politics revolving around gender have certainly reanimated Christian nationalism. Before these issues became visible, however, Christianity of the Evangelical ilk was arguably weaponized to regulate non-Christian others, especially Muslims. A study that focuses on the genealogies of Christian nationalism and their contemporary varieties is long overdue, if one does not exist already.’

The author of the paper has engaged as extensively as possible with the authors which the reviewer mentions to find out their views on Christian nationalism in Ghana. To bring into the paper a necessarily extensive discussion about how the concept of Christian nationalism employed by the author of the paper builds on the work of such significant figures as Gifford, Meyer, De Witte and Asamoah-Gyadu would, in the author’s view lead to a very much longer paper with a somewhat different focus.  In the paper, the author refers to the work of Andreas Heuser, theologian and political scientist and Dean of the Faculty of Theology at the University of Basel, who has written extensively about Christian nationalism in Ghana in, for example, Andreas Heuser. 2020. Megachurches, dominion theology and development. In Jens Koehrsen and Andreas Heuser (eds.). Does Religion Make a Difference? Religious NGOs in international Development Collaboration. Baden-Baden: Nomos/PANO, pp. 243-262. In this chapter, Heuser identifies Nicholas Duncan-Williams and Mensa Otabil as prominent Christian nationalists.

Finally, there are various discussions of Christian nationalism in Ghana available on the internet, including the following referred to in the paper: Some are written by Ghanaians and others are not. They are of course open to Ghanaians and non-Ghanaians alike to read. Daswani. Girish. 2020. The Christian nation project. Available online: https://thechristiannationproject.net/daswani/ (accessed on 31 May 2023).

Daswani, Girish. 2021. Ghana’s crackdown on LGBTQ+ has a (neo)colonial and Christian face. Available online: https://www.africaproactive.com/blog/releasethe21-the-lgbtq-community-and-christian-nationalism-inghana (accessed on 14 November 2022).

Lauterbach, Karen, George Bob-Milliar and Sandra Boakye. 2022. ‘The Christian nation project’. Available online: https://thechristiannationproject.net/lauterbach/ (accessed on 23 September 2022).

Lauterbach, Karen, and George M. Bob-Milliar. 2023. Grounding the prosperity gospel. Sites of wealth and power in Ghana. In Michael Wilkinson and Jörg Haustein. Eds. The Pentecostal World. London, Routledge, pp. 340-351.

Others include: Jeffrey Haynes, 'Is Christian nationalism a threat to democracy in Africa?', 'Democracy in Africa', 9 June 2023; http://democracyinafrica.org/is-christian-nationalism-a-threat-to-democracy-in-africa/

The overall point is that while Christian nationalism is not, to the knowledge of the author, an explicit topic of popular conversations in Ghana, it is a topic which has engaged Ghanaian and non-Ghanaians academics, including political scientists and theologians. Material has been published on the topic mainly the internet.

 

3) Lastly, Christian nationalism should be discussed in the larger context of Ghanaian

nationalism. The historical overview presented on pp. 4–6 is factually correct and also

enlightening when it comes to state-church relations in Ghana. However, the relationship

between the older Ghanaian secular nationalism and the more recent Christian nationalism is

treated rather superficially. This is problematic in two ways. Firstly, the reader does not get

to know about decisive historical impact of missionary Christianity in the birth and

development of Ghanaian nationalism. In this respect I highly recommend Cati Coe’s

Dilemmas of Culture in African Schools: Youth, Nationalism, and the Transformation of

Knowledge (2005). This is a brilliant book, which provides both a historical and

ethnographic analysis of the relationship between nationalism and Christianity in Ghana.

Secondly, and even more importantly, it would be crucial to discuss the Ghanaian

Pentecostal-charismatic attitudes towards secular nationalism. In previous scholarship the

Pentecostals have been described as a movement who challenged and eventually broke the

hegemony of secular nationalism in Ghana. Therefore, characterizing them as nationalists is

not a straightforward matter. In this regard I would recommend selected chapters in two

seminal books: chapter 7 in Birgit Meyer’s Sensational Movies: Video, Vision, and

Christianity in Ghana (2015) and chapter 2 in Charles Piot’s Nostalgia for the Future: West

Africa after the Cold War (2010).

I want to emphasize that tackling these questions is not just a matter of providing more

historical and cultural background. It is critical considering the credibility of the Christian

nationalism concept in the Ghanaian context: the group of people that the author now calls

(Christian) nationalists have been formerly characterized as antithetical to nationalism. What

has changed? In my opinion, issues 1 and 2 can be corrected quite easily, just by clarifying even more thoroughly what is meant by Christian nationalism and what is not. However, addressing issue 3 will require getting acquainted with some new literature and contemplating on how it relates to the author’s own material and idea

Current Christian nationalism in Ghana is closely linked to the burgeoning of new Pentecostal/Charismatic churches which has occurred since the early 1990s. The return of democracy in 1993 stimulated the public voice of Christian churches, including the new Pentecostal/Charismatic churches. Leaders of several such churches, including Nicholas Duncan-Williams and Mensa Otabil, several of whom are mentioned in the paper, are described by German academic, Andreas Heuser, who has studies religion and politics in Ghana for 30 years, as Christian nationalists. The paper does not seek to compare Ghana’s Christian nationalists with secular nationalists in Ghana, as the latter are perhaps most closely associated with the CPP regime of Kwame Nkrumah, which came to an end following a military coup in 1966. In recent times, secular nationalists have been less prominent.  

Assessing Christian nationalism in Ghana in the paper, the aim is not to compare and contrast with an earlier era characterised by ‘secular nationalism’. It is frequently asserted, including by renowned Ghanaians scholars, such as Asamoah-Gyadu, that Ghana is a highly religious country with religion consistently informing most Ghanaians’ worldviews. The specific kind of Christian nationalism in the paper is associated with a novel kind of Christian nationalism which has become prominent in recent years, notably during/since the Trump presidency in the USA. To assess Christian nationalism in Ghana, the paper draws on the American ‘model’ of Christian nationalism described by Whitehead, Andrew L., and Samuel L. Perry 2020. Taking America Back for God: Christian Nationalism in the United States. New York, Oxford University Press, in relation to Ghana.

In their recent study of Christian nationalism in the USA, Whitehead and Perry argue that Christian nationalist beliefs fuse multiple markers of traditional American identity (Christianity, whiteness, conservatism) into a single cultural framework that is not limited to devout evangelicals, while it is strongly associated with them. Christian nationalist beliefs in Ghana similarly draw on traditional markers of identity (Christianity, conservatism, antagonism to ‘progressive’ ideas imported from abroad, such as LGBTQ+ equality) to articulate a single cultural framework that appeals not only to the especially devout but also incorporates people who more generally share such values.

The argument of the paper is that this is a novel kind of nationalism, drawing on specific religious beliefs, which can ideationally be linked to phenomena happening elsewhere, notably the USA. As a result, an explicit and lengthy comparison of Ghana’s current Christian nationalism with the country’s secular nationalism would arguably fall outside of the parameters of the current article. This is not to claim that such a discussion is not required in a comprehensive analysis of nationalism in Ghana, from both religious and secular viewpoints. For the reviewer’s information, the author of the paper is currently researching for a research monograph on Christian nationalism in Ghana and the discussion which the reviewer refers to would form an important theoretical element of that book.

Reviewer 3 Report

MDPI – review of “Christian Nationalism and Politics in Ghana”

 

1.      The article is very well written, structured, and coherent.  All of my critical comments or observations should be easy to responded to.

 

2.      In several places the author comments that they are locating phenomena in Ghana within global trends, that Christian nationalism should be viewed as “a manifestation of a regional and global trend”. Yet, the article mentions only the U.S. and, in Africa, Zambia (the most frequently mentioned other African country, I believe) and Nigeria, maybe another country in Africa as well.  I would rather the author accent the regional trend aspect of the inquiry, even though Zambia is not proximate to Ghana, and eschew any remark to the effect that they are seeing Ghana in the light of global trends.

 

I say this also because the phenomena in Ghana have connections to American Christian nationalism, mostly grounded in Pentecostalism, and these elements in American society have similar connections to other countries, principally in Central and South America (e.g., Guatemala, Brazil), and the same phenomenon exists elsewhere (e.g., South Korea), but the author does not mention these other places.  Hence, a global context is not provided or even attempted – unless mentioning the U.S., a fount of Christian nationalist trends, counts as covering global trends.

 

3.      I would the authors to be more critical as to the historical elements of the phenomena they describe, do some more disentangling. Early on we learn that the fusion of religious, social, economic, and political power “draws on enduring myths about the nation’s religious character.”  But, Ghana is a relatively new country, and “Christianity and Islam both arrived in what is today Ghana in the 15^th century and were influenced and shaped by local cultural values.”

 

There was a period of about four centuries, including various European contacts and presence and colonial rule until 1957, during which time older, indigenous Ghanaian society was refashioned. Hence, to speak of “enduring myths” about “the nation’s religious character” needs more discussion, as this may refer to the older, indigenous society prior to European contact, or to myths melded during European influence and colonialization, or to myths of Ghana itself as its own entity and relatively recent identity. Even more recent is the advent of Pentecostal theology and an associated prosperity mindset, neither of which are likely embodiments of that older, indigenous society.

 

What troubles me about the lack of clarity as I perceive it is, why not present contemporary phenomena such as an apparently heartfelt animosity towards LGBT persons as itself an aspect of colonialization in that this sentiment arrived in its present form with the Europeans? While the anti-gay animus is presented deceptively by the WCF as part of an anti-colonial rhetoric, an intrusion of decadent Western influences, isn’t the perspective making this call just as much an intrusion? To put this another way, isn’t Pentecostalism itself a colonization, a continuance of Western colonialization begun with those first contacts with Christianity and Islam in the 15^th century?

 

Thinking along these lines may allow an argument to be made that elites’ attitudes towards Christian nationalism may be as much about privileging themselves, advancing their own political and economic interests, as about a deeply felt theology that came from abroad?

 

4.      I was taken aback when, on page 13, after a discussion of the proposed national Christian cathedral, the reader learns that there has been a national mosque since 2021, a very large one (situated on a 40 acre plot) when compared to the proposed Christian national cathedral (situated on a 14 acre plot). It seems that Ghanaians did not find the previous national religious site controversial, but some do the proposed new one? I would like for the author to elaborate on the difference in reception of these two national religious sites, and why the nation cannot have two national religious sites. Is it because the proposed one reflects the religious views of a greater proportion of the population, one that (amazingly) was relatively unperturbed by the national mosque?

 

Could the whipping up of anti-Muslim sentiment, especially the ahistorical suggestion that Christian nationalism is more Ghanaian, simply be old-fashioned power politics, elites seeking to maintain their share of economic and political power for themselves, if not increase it by suggesting that Ghana’s principal religion’s theology is the one supporting prosperity, an allegedly more authentic Ghanaian outlook?

 

5.      A couple minor, pedantic points:

a.      The author writes “[t]he relationship between religion and nationalism is not axiomatic or inevitable,” as if a reader might be predisposed to thinking it is; why?

b.      The author writes “[r]eligious nationalism signifies a demonstrably close, even synonymous, relationship between two concepts ‘religion’ and ‘nationalism’, which are not inevitably close ideologically.” I do not understand why the two different terms might nonetheless be regarded as ‘synonymous’, which is commonly understood to mean interchangeable. Other aspects of a society could also be “the defining component of what a nation is said to comprise.” In those many cases where another aspect is the ‘defining component’ of a nation, is the other aspect thereby ‘synonymous’ with the nation’s nationalism? If so, then in such places nationalism is ‘synonymous’ with a good many other ‘defining components’, and this risks the distinctiveness of each component, or of the term ‘nationalism’.

c.       Christian nationalism is one form of religious nationalism, which is itself one form of nationalism. That in Ghana the nationalism takes the form of an imported religion urged on principally by the elite reinforces, to my mind, this new form of colonialization – though the old form too used religion and the felt need to spread it far and wide as a pretext for conquest, for re-shaping their society and for asserting power over indigenous peoples – just what elites today seem to want to do!

d.      If there hadn’t been contact with the Europeans and eventual colonialization, and the arrival of Christianity and Islam, would the form nationalism would take in Ghana be religious?

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

1. The article is very well written, structured, and coherent. All of my critical comments or observations should be easy to responded to.

THANK YOU FOR THESE COMMENTS.

2. In several places the author comments that they are locating phenomena in Ghana within global trends, that Christian nationalism should be viewed as “a manifestation of a regional and global trend”. Yet, the article mentions only the U.S. and, in Africa, Zambia (the most frequently mentioned other African country, I believe) and Nigeria, maybe another country in Africa as well. I would rather the author accent the regional trend aspect of the inquiry, even though Zambia is not proximate to Ghana, and eschew any remark to the effect that they are seeing Ghana in the light of global trends.

THANKS FOR THESE VALUABLE COMMENTS. I HAVE AMENDED THE TEXT TO REFLECT THESE POINTS (PLEASE SEE IN TRACK CHANGES)

I say this also because the phenomena in Ghana have connections to American Christian nationalism, mostly grounded in Pentecostalism, and these elements in American society have similar connections to other countries, principally in Central and South America (e.g., Guatemala, Brazil), and the same phenomenon exists elsewhere (e.g., South Korea), but the author does not mention these other places.  Hence, a global context is not provided or even attempted – unless mentioning the U.S., a fount of Christian nationalist trends, counts as covering global trends.

THANKS FOR THESE VALUABLE COMMENTS. I HAVE AMENDED THE TEXT TO REFLECT THESE POINTS (PLEASE SEE IN TRACK CHANGES)

3. 3. I would the authors to be more critical as to the historical elements of the phenomena they describe, do some more disentangling. Early on we learn that the fusion of religious, social, economic, and political power “draws on enduring myths about the nation’s religious character.” But, Ghana is a relatively new country, and “Christianity and Islam both arrived in what is today Ghana in the 15^th century and were influenced and shaped by local cultural values.”

THANKS FOR THESE VALUABLE COMMENTS. I HAVE AMENDED THE TEXT TO REFLECT THESE POINTS (PLEASE SEE IN TRACK CHANGES)

There was a period of about four centuries, including various European contacts and presence and colonial rule until 1957, during which time older, indigenous Ghanaian society was refashioned. Hence, to speak of “enduring myths” about “the nation’s religious character” needs more discussion, as this may refer to the older, indigenous society prior to European contact, or to myths melded during European influence and colonialization, or to myths of Ghana itself as its own entity and relatively recent identity. Even more recent is the advent of Pentecostal theology and an associated prosperity mindset, neither of which are likely embodiments of that older, indigenous society.

THANKS FOR THESE VALUABLE COMMENTS. I HAVE AMENDED THE TEXT TO REFLECT THESE POINTS (PLEASE SEE IN TRACK CHANGES)

What troubles me about the lack of clarity as I perceive it is, why not present contemporary phenomena such as an apparently heartfelt animosity towards LGBT persons as itself an aspect of colonialization in that this sentiment arrived in its present form with the Europeans? While the anti-gay animus is presented deceptively by the WCF as part of an anti-colonial rhetoric, an intrusion of decadent Western influences, isn’t the perspective making this call just as much an intrusion? To put this another way, isn’t Pentecostalism itself a colonization, a continuance of Western colonialization begun with those first contacts with Christianity and Islam in the 15^th century?

THANKS FOR THESE VALUABLE COMMENTS. I HAVE AMENDED THE TEXT TO REFLECT THESE POINTS (PLEASE SEE IN TRACK CHANGES)

Thinking along these lines may allow an argument to be made that elites’ attitudes towards Christian nationalism may be as much about privileging themselves, advancing their own political and economic interests, as about a deeply felt theology that came from abroad?

THANKS FOR THESE VALUABLE COMMENTS. I HAVE AMENDED THE TEXT TO REFLECT THESE POINTS (PLEASE SEE IN TRACK CHANGES)

4. I was taken aback when, on page 13, after a discussion of the proposed national Christian cathedral, the reader learns that there has been a national mosque since 2021, a very large one (situated on a 40 acre plot) when compared to the proposed Christian national cathedral (situated on a 14 acre plot). It seems that Ghanaians did not find the previous national religious site controversial, but some do the proposed new one? I would like for the author to elaborate on the difference in reception of these two national religious sites, and why the nation cannot have two national religious sites. Is it because the proposed one reflects the religious views of a greater proportion of the population, one that (amazingly) was relatively unperturbed by the national mosque?

THANKS FOR THESE VALUABLE COMMENTS. I HAVE NOW SUPPLIED AN EXPLNATION FOR THIS APPARENT ANOMALY, AND HAVE AMENDED THE TEXT ACCORDINGLY (PLEASE SEE IN TRACK CHANGES)

Could the whipping up of anti-Muslim sentiment, especially the ahistorical suggestion that Christian nationalism is more Ghanaian, simply be old-fashioned power politics, elites seeking to maintain their share of economic and political power for themselves, if not increase it by suggesting that Ghana’s principal religion’s theology is the one supporting prosperity, an allegedly more authentic Ghanaian outlook?

THANKS FOR THESE VALUABLE COMMENTS. I HAVE AMENDED THE TEXT TO REFLECT THESE POINTS (PLEASE SEE IN TRACK CHANGES)

5. A couple minor, pedantic points:
6. The author writes “[t]he relationship between religion and nationalism is not axiomatic or inevitable,” as if a reader might be predisposed to thinking it is; why? WORDING NOW CHANGED
7. The author writes “[r]eligious nationalism signifies a demonstrably close, even synonymous, relationship between two concepts ‘religion’ and ‘nationalism’, which are not inevitably close ideologically.” I do not understand why the two different terms might nonetheless be regarded as ‘synonymous’, which is commonly understood to mean interchangeable. Other aspects of a society could also be “the defining component of what a nation is said to comprise.” In those many cases where another aspect is the ‘defining component’ of a nation, is the other aspect thereby ‘synonymous’ with the nation’s nationalism? If so, then in such places nationalism is ‘synonymous’ with a good many other ‘defining components’, and this risks the distinctiveness of each component, or of the term ‘nationalism’. WORDING NOW CHANGED
8. Christian nationalism is one form of religious nationalism, which is itself one form of nationalism. That in Ghana the nationalism takes the form of an imported religion urged on principally by the elite reinforces, to my mind, this new form of colonialization – though the old form too used religion and the felt need to spread it far and wide as a pretext for conquest, for re-shaping their society and for asserting power over indigenous peoples – just what elites today seem to want to do!
9. If there hadn’t been contact with the Europeans and eventual colonialization, and the arrival of Christianity and Islam, would the form nationalism would take in Ghana be religious?

THANKS FOR THESE COMMENTS

Reviewer 4 Report

The abstract mentions the values and beliefs of Christian Nationalism three times. It is advisable to avoid such redundancy.

Nowhere in the article are the values and beliefs of Christian Nationalism specified, not even the most relevant ones. Although the argument revolves around Christian Nationalism's claim to impose them on the national community, they are always alluded generically, taking them for granted.  These values and beliefs need to be mentioned and described, so that other researchers can compare the case of Ghana with other nations where evangelicalism seeks to colonize politics, such as the United States or Brazil,

At the beginning of the introduction it is stated that "The main theoretical contribution of the article is to examine Christian nationalism in Ghana in comparison with other African countries". But this work is not characterized by its theoretical contribution, since it is developed at a fundamentally descriptive epistemological level. In this sense, it would be desirable to improve the balance between the empirical and the theoretical. First, the large amount of concrete information about Ghanaian political and religious organizations and their individual leaders should be presented in a more synthetic and orderly manner, so that the foreign researcher can get a clear picture of the situation. The excessive number of personalities and organizations clouds the overview that this article should provide for those interested in the subject who are not familiar with Ghana. Since this is a journal of international circulation, this point should be taken into special consideration. On the other hand, it would also be desirable to expand the demographic information, if possible, by providing data on the proportional weight of charismatic evangelism in the Christian population as a whole, as well as the representativeness of the organizations mentioned specifically. Finally, in this regard, it would be useful to provide information on the ideologies of the parties competing electorally in Ghana and which ones embrace Christian nationalism.

Secondly, the theoretical background of the article should be expanded: it mainly explains what is meant by Christian Nationalism with the addition of a scanty paragraph to the relationship between religion and nationalism in three authors (E. Gellner, A- Smith and E. Hobsbawm). However, the theoretical bakground of the article should consider processes such as secularization and the separation of religion and politics, which occur in societies such as those in the West, while they do not occur in other societies. It should also give theoretical coverage to the three cases analyzed: The national cathedral, The LGBTQ+ community and the Christian-Muslim relations. All three cases fit the theoretical models that describe populism and the ideology of the far-right parties. A key element of these ideologies is the exaltation of the we, the authentic people who are symbolized by the national cathedral, and their defense against their enemies, represented by scapegoats such as the LGBTQ+ community and the Muslim minority (see Ruth Wodak in this regard). The connection between Trump and his theologian with Ghanaian Christian Nationalism invites to compare this case with other countries where the relationship between far right-populism and evangelicalism is very strong.

 

There are some sentences that require correction:

-Côte d’Ivoire is the same phenomenon as in Ghana

-

-On page 7 the same quotation is included three times with slight variations:

is undergirded by identification with a conservative political orientation (though not necessarily a political party), Bible belief, premillennial visions of moral decay, and divine sanction for conquest’ (Swanson 2022).

Author Response

The abstract mentions the values and beliefs of Christian Nationalism three times. It is advisable to avoid such redundancy.

THANKS FOR THESE VALUABLE COMMENTS. I HAVE AMENDED THE TEXT TO REFLECT THESE POINTS (PLEASE SEE IN TRACK CHANGES)

Nowhere in the article are the values and beliefs of Christian Nationalism specified, not even the most relevant ones. Although the argument revolves around Christian Nationalism's claim to impose them on the national community, they are always alluded generically, taking them for granted.  These values and beliefs need to be mentioned and described, so that other researchers can compare the case of Ghana with other nations where evangelicalism seeks to colonize politics, such as the United States or Brazil,identified on p2

I HAVE INCUDED A DISCUSSION OF THE VALUES AND BELIEFS OF CHRISTIAN NATIONALISM AT PP. 7-10, ESPECIALLY PP. 7-8, WHERE GHANA IS COMPARED TO THE USA

At the beginning of the introduction it is stated that "The main theoretical contribution of the article is to examine Christian nationalism in Ghana in comparison with other African countries". But this work is not characterized by its theoretical contribution, since it is developed at a fundamentally descriptive epistemological level. In this sense, it would be desirable to improve the balance between the empirical and the theoretical. First, the large amount of concrete information about Ghanaian political and religious organizations and their individual leaders should be presented in a more synthetic and orderly manner, so that the foreign researcher can get a clear picture of the situation. The excessive number of personalities and organizations clouds the overview that this article should provide for those interested in the subject who are not familiar with Ghana. Since this is a journal of international circulation, this point should be taken into special consideration. On the other hand, it would also be desirable to expand the demographic information, if possible, by providing data on the proportional weight of charismatic evangelism in the Christian population as a whole, as well as the representativeness of the organizations mentioned specifically. Finally, in this regard, it would be useful to provide information on the ideologies of the parties competing electorally in Ghana and which ones embrace Christian nationalism.

THANKS FOR THESE VALUABLE COMMENTS. I HAVE AMENDED THE TEXT TO REFLECT SOME OF THESE POINTS (PLEASE SEE IN TRACK CHANGES)

Secondly, the theoretical background of the article should be expanded: it mainly explains what is meant by Christian Nationalism with the addition of a scanty paragraph to the relationship between religion and nationalism in three authors (E. Gellner, A- Smith and E. Hobsbawm). However, the theoretical bakground of the article should consider processes such as secularization and the separation of religion and politics, which occur in societies such as those in the West, while they do not occur in other societies. It should also give theoretical coverage to the three cases analyzed: The national cathedral, The LGBTQ+ community and the Christian-Muslim relations. All three cases fit the theoretical models that describe populism and the ideology of the far-right parties. A key element of these ideologies is the exaltation of the we, the authentic people who are symbolized by the national cathedral, and their defense against their enemies, represented by scapegoats such as the LGBTQ+ community and the Muslim minority (see Ruth Wodak in this regard). The connection between Trump and his theologian with Ghanaian Christian Nationalism invites to compare this case with other countries where the relationship between far right-populism and evangelicalism is very strong.

THANKS FOR THESE VALUABLE COMMENTS. I HAVE AMENDED THE TEXT TO REFLECT SOME OF THESE POINTS (PLEASE SEE IN TRACK CHANGES). I DO NOT HOWEVER INCLUDE A DISCUSSION OF POPULISM OR THE FAR RIGHT IN THIS PAPER, AS I AM CONCENTRATING ON THESE PHENOMENA. CONCENTRATING ON GHANA, I SEEK TO EXPLAIN THE PARTICULAR ASPECTS OF CHRISTIAN NATIONALISM IN THAT COUNTRY. WHILE IT MAY BE BOTH POPULIST AND IN SOME PEOPLE'S VIEW LINKED TO FAR RIGHT IDEAS, THESE TERMS ARE NOT OFTEN USED IN ANALYSIS OF POLITICAL DEVELOPMENTS IN GHANA AND I HAVE STUCK WITH CONVENTION IN THE PAPER.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

There are some sentences that require correction:

-Côte d’Ivoire is the same phenomenon as in Ghana

-WHAT I MEAN BY THIS IS THAT CHRISTIAN NATIONALISM IN COTE D'IVOIRE IS A DIFFERENT PHENOMENON COMPARED TO THAT IN GHANA

-On page 7 the same quotation is included three times with slight variations:

is undergirded by identification with a conservative political orientation (though not necessarily a political party), Bible belief, premillennial visions of moral decay, and divine sanction for conquest’ (Swanson 2022). THE REASON FOR THE INCLUSION OF THESE POINTS SEVERAL TIMES IS TO ESTABLISH THE PARTICULAR ASPECTS OF CHRISTIAN NATIONALISM IN GHANA COMPARED TO THE USA

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

I have now had the opportunity to get acquainted with the revised version of the article manuscript plus the author’s reply to my comments. It appears that none of the revisions made to the new version address the questions I raised in my review. Consequently, I don’t see any basis for changing my overall opinion on the quality of the manuscript. I am grateful for the detailed response from the author, but I am afraid I am still unconvinced.

 

Firstly, I suggested that the author would discuss whether Christian nationalism is an analytical concept or whether it is also an emic term in Ghanaian political culture. I expressed doubts concerning the latter. In his response the author mentions instances, where Ghanaians have used the term. When I claimed that Christian nationalism is not a stable in Ghanaian political vocabulary, I didn’t mean that no Ghanaian has ever heard of it. Certainly, there must be Ghanaians familiar with it – especially in the academia, where the author takes his examples from. However, I would still argue that the Ghanaian public at large is not acquainted with it. The author seems to agree with me, as he states elsewhere in his reply that “Christian nationalism is not, to the knowledge of the author, an explicit topic of popular conversations in Ghana, it is a topic which has engaged Ghanaian and non-Ghanaians academics, including political scientists and theologians”. This leaves me confounded. Why can’t this be mentioned in the manuscript? Why is this not important?

 

Secondly, I mentioned that a number of scholars have studied the same phenomenon that the manuscript deals with even though they have not (at least in their published works) labelled it Christian nationalism. Accordingly, I asked the author to explain in closer detail what his work adds to this existing scholarship. In his response the author lists various important scholars with whom he has discussed the matter and whether they accept the term Christian nationalism. He concludes by saying that “[t]o bring into the paper a necessarily extensive discussion about how the concept of Christian nationalism employed by the author of the paper builds on the work of such significant figures as Gifford, Meyer, De Witte and Asamoah-Gyadu would, in the author’s view lead to a very much longer paper with a somewhat different focus”. I agree that this is a topic that could easily take a lot of space (again, this begs the question, why the author insists in the manuscript that only “little scholarly attention” has been devoted to this subject). However, I think it would still be very important to clarify what the introduction of the term Christian nationalism adds to these discussions. I am sure it can be done concisely, and it would help the reader a great deal in assessing what the contribution of this article will be to the current scholarship.

 

Thirdly, I suggested that the author would discuss the relationship between the older Ghanaian secular nationalism and the more recent Christian nationalism. In his reply, the author states that “an explicit and lengthy comparison of Ghana’s current Christian nationalism with the country’s secular nationalism would arguably fall outside of the parameters of the current article.” It is true that this is a topic that would warrant a treatment of its own, and I am happy to hear that the author has plans in this regard. Then again, I can’t see how this could be completely excluded from the present manuscript. The author highlights the newness of Christian nationalism, and its external origins, but surely the discussion on novelty should not be limited to contemporary observations. The reader can understand its newness in qualitative sense (and not only temporal), if enough background is given on what has preceded it. As I pointed out in my comments earlier, at the present moment the historical context provided by the author touches on the state-church relations in Ghana but not so much nationalism, which I think would be at least equally important.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your thoughtful and valuable critique of the article. I have sought explicitly to take your concerns into account. In response to each of the three points you make, I have incorporated responses to your suggestions into the text. Each insertion is presented in red so you can easily see what I have done to accommodate your concerns. 

Reviewer 4 Report

The author has implemented some of the suggestions made after the first reading of the paper. But I think that before being published he should apply some of the ones he did not make:

1. The abstract mentions three times "the values and beliefs of Christian Nationalism". It is advisable to avoid such redundancy.

2.It is not admissible to repeat three times the same literal quotation in the same section of the article and in almost consecutive paragraphs. The second and third quotations should be replaced by periphrasis or, better still, by indirect allusion (the characteristics mentioned by Swanson, ...): moreover, the third quotation is assigned to two authors other than the author of the first quotation. This discrepancy should be clarified

Page 7:

They argue that in the USA Christian nationalism, 'is undergirded by identification with a conservative political orientation (though not necessarily a political party), Bible belief, premillennial visions of moral decay, and divine sanction for conquest' (Swanson 2022). Their characterisation of Christian nationalism is rela expression levant to Ghana, as Christian nationalists advocate a fusion of Christianity with Ghanaian civic life and exhibit a 'con-servative political orientation (though not necessarily a political party), Bible belief, premillennial visions of moral decay, and divine sanction for conquest', via dominion theology

Page 8

Pentecostal/Charismatic church leaders are often publicly influential in Ghana via, among others, the media, press conferences, Facebook and other social media pages, and their personal websites (Benyah 2019). Some churches, notably the Church of Pentecost, work strategically to build God's kingdom on earth via dominion theology (The Church of Pentecost 2019). This cultural framework 'blurs the distinctions between Christian identity and national identity, viewing the two as closely related and seeking to enhance and preserve their union'. It is characterised by a socially conservative political orientation (although not overtly con-nected to any political party), unshakeable belief in the authority of the Bible, premillennial visions of moral decay, divine sanction for Christian domination, and an approach to morality rooted in devotion to Christianity and Ghana's conservative culture (Whitehead and Perry 2020; Haynes 2022b).

3.  As for the theoretical background to the concept of USA Christian nationalism:

It is reduced to a scanty paragraph devoted to the relationship between religion and nationalism in three authors (E. Gellner, A- Smith and E. Hobsbawm, as I indicated in my previous report, and some definitions of this concept that do not offer a general socio-historical framework of the relationship between religion and nationalism once this ideology appears in modern Western societies during the 19th century. The mere appeal to the relationship of the concepts "religion" and "nationalism" as autonomous entities that merge in certain cases IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO UNDERSTAND THE WAY IN WHICH THE RELATIONSHIP HAS ALWAYS BEEN CONSIDERED A FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENT OF THE NATION AS A HISTORICAL RELATIONSHIP IN MODERN APPROACHES TO THE CONCEPT OF NATION. Tocqueville had already argued in "Democracy in America" that religion was one of the three fundamental elements that gave the nation its charter.  For his part, "Emile Durkheim", in "The Elementary Forms of Religious Life", maintains that in Western modernity new forms of manifestation of the sacred appear that compete with traditional religious cults such as Christianity, whether it be the nation, which sacralizes the cultural or patriotic bonds that unite the national community", or the human person, which sacralizes the human rights of the individual as the axis of democratic political systems. Even the differentiation between the religious, political and cultural spheres posed by Max Weber in his "Essays on the Sociology of Religion" is relevant to contextualize the relationship between religion and politics beyond mentioning how this differentiation has not occurred in Muslim political regimes.

In this regard, Gellner, Smith and Hobsbawm offer very relevant ideas, but they need to be said.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your thoughtful and valuable critique of the article. I have sought explicitly to take your concerns into account. In response to each of the points you make, I have incorporated responses to your suggestions into the text. Each insertion is presented in red so you can easily see what I have done to accommodate your concerns.  

Round 3

Reviewer 2 Report

The author has now addressed the concerns that I brought up in my review. I consider the manuscript acceptable for publication.

Reviewer 4 Report

Accepted in present form