What role does the Council for National Policy play in Christian nationalist movements?
Executive summary
The Council for National Policy (CNP) is routinely described in reporting and research as a closed, influential network that connects conservative donors, religious-right leaders, and policy organizations to advance a Christian conservative agenda; critics say it promotes Christian nationalist goals and helps bankroll and coordinate projects such as Project 2025 [1] [2] [3]. CNP’s own materials present it as defending “Judeo‑Christian values” and serving as a forum for conservative strategy, while journalists and scholars trace its origins to founders who explicitly sought a conservative, faith‑aligned counterweight to perceived liberal institutions [4] [1] [5].
1. What CNP says it is — a private forum for conservatives
CNP’s public website frames the organization as a membership forum that believes the Founders built the nation on Judeo‑Christian values and that conservative leaders should coordinate to defend those principles; it calls itself “one of the oldest & most effective organizations in the history of the conservative movement” [4]. That language signals a self‑understanding of cultural stewardship and policy influence rather than overtly theological rule‑making [4].
2. How reporters and scholars describe CNP’s role in Christian nationalism
Investigative reporting and academic work describe CNP as a secretive, agenda‑setting umbrella where religious‑right leaders, donors, activists and allied policy shops meet to plan strategy and fund campaigns that align with Christian nationalist aims — from judicial nominations to education and family‑policy efforts [6] [1] [2]. Anne Nelson and others have documented founders who wanted a Christian conservative alternative to establishments like the Council on Foreign Relations, and those accounts link CNP’s origins to fears that secular or left‑leaning forces threatened a Christian public order [1] [2].
3. Money, networks and policy blueprints: the practical levers
Multiple sources connect CNP to funding streams and to organizations that litigate or lobby for faith‑based policy goals, and they place CNP within networks that amplify initiatives like Project 2025 — a Heritage‑linked blueprint critics say embeds Christian nationalist ideas into government planning [7] [8] [9]. Advocacy groups and investigative projects contend that CNP helps coordinate donors, lawyers and conservative NGOs to reshape institutions via appointments, litigation and policy templates [7] [3].
4. The accusation: CNP as a driver of Christian nationalist regime change
Critics, documentaries and watchdogs depict CNP not just as a coordinating body but as actively enabling an authoritarian tilt rooted in Christian nationalist ideology — framing its work as part of a “holy war” to remake state power, including restrictions on LGBTQ rights, abortion and pluralistic governance [10] [3] [8]. These sources argue CNP’s secrecy and donor connections make it especially potent in translating religious‑right aims into state action [10] [3].
5. Counterpoint and limits in the record
CNP’s own materials do not use the phrase “Christian nationalist regime change”; instead they emphasize heritage and conservative cooperation [4]. Some journalistic sources treat CNP as an influential conservative nerve center rather than a single monolithic engine of theocratic takeover, and academic analyses stress network effects — how mailing lists and media ecosystems catalyze movements — rather than attributing all outcomes to CNP alone [1] [11]. Available sources do not mention CNP explicitly claiming responsibility for Project 2025 authorship; rather they place CNP in an ecosystem of aligned actors [8] [7].
6. Stakes, actors and the broader debate
Advocates for pluralism — including the National Council of Churches and various watchdogs — warn that Christian nationalist ideas circulating through networks that include CNP threaten religious freedom and democratic norms by elevating a particular religious identity over civic equality [12] [3]. Supporters within conservative circles present participation in CNP as ordinary coalition‑building to defend perceived cultural values [4]. This competing framing — protection of heritage versus transformation of state power — is central to how sources interpret CNP’s role [4] [12].
7. What reporting does not yet resolve
Scholars and journalists document influence, coordination and ideological alignment, but available sources do not provide definitive evidence that CNP alone engineers specific policy enactments or that it centrally authors Project 2025; they instead show CNP operating as a powerful node inside a broader movement of donors, think tanks and faith groups [1] [8] [7]. The record shows strong links and shared objectives, but not a single line of causation from CNP meetings to every outcome critics attribute to Christian nationalist power networks [1] [11].
Bottom line: reporting and research portray the Council for National Policy as a secretive, well‑connected institutional hub that organizes and funds conservative, often faith‑inflected strategies; critics say that hub materially advances Christian nationalist aims, while CNP’s public materials frame its work as conventional conservative coalition building [4] [1] [2].