Reply to Steven Foertsch's “Defending Critical Epistemology: The Case of Christian Nationalism and Christofascism”

ABSTRACT In his reply to “Old Wine in New Wineskins,” Foertsch argues that positivist critiques of the “Christian nationalism” literature are deficient and advocates for continued application of critical epistemology in this area of research. In response, I argue, first, that the focus on positivism mischaracterizes the interpretivist critique in “Old Wine in New Wineskins” while unintentionally implicating most of the evidentiary basis for claims about “Christian nationalism.” Second, critical epistemology relies on a set of first principles that are, at minimum, non‐obvious and controversial, but necessary for his counter‐critique to be effective. I reject critical epistemology for its circularity and offer an alternative and more minimal set of first principles from which to conduct sociological inquiry. I nonetheless affirm Foertsch's explicit recognition of the critical epistemological commitments underlying the “Christian nationalism” research agenda as well as his call for deeper philosophical reflection in this area of scholarship.