Journalist Marci McDonald has stirred controversy with her new book detailing the growing influence of evangelicals on the government.

If there’s one thing that Marci McDonald’s book, The Armageddon Factor: The Rise of Christian Nationalism in Canada, proves, it’s this: People can interpret the written word in a dizzying amount of ways — same book, totally different observations. Heck, lots of people just skim over some text and call it a day. This is certainly true of many of the critics braying about this book. Now, if only there was another book that people seem to interpret and misinterpret constantly….

McDonald has highlighted a growing trend within the Harper government to pander to evangelicals, those whose Christian morals govern their real world actions and who believe in the infallibility of the bible, or at least their interpretation of it. Abortion? No way. Assisted suicide? Don’t play God. Homosexuality? An abomination!

But McDonald covers more ground than that. What she terms Christian nationalism is not limited to evangelicals. She includes other religious groups that believe Canada should be governed based on biblical ideals.

This book isn’t saying the scary Christians are taking over, or not yet anyway, despite the claims of some scribes and screamers. McDonald says that Harper, always the strategist, is courting them to support his minority government.

“I’ve said the danger of using religion as an electoral party-building tool is you open up the road that we’ve seen the Americans go down, where the debate becomes so polarized, so vitriolic, ad hominem attacks,” says McDonald. “We have to ask: Do we really want that development in Canadian politics?”

“It’s one thing that you might have people of faith in the general debate, that’s not a bad thing,” she says. “It’s when reaching out on religious and moral issues that are very charged, it’s a dangerous Pandora’s box to open.”

Although Harper has always been considered a fiscal conservative and uninterested in the great social battles around same-sex marriage and abortion, he is an evangelical. Does this play into his decision-making? It really doesn’t matter. After inheriting a religious political base from the leadership race with Stockwell Day (a true believer), and then courting it for his own benefit, Harper must at least throw these folks a bone now and then. He’s walking a tightrope.

“In the last year-and-a-half, since this global economic meltdown, Harper’s natural base where he would feel more philosophically comfortable, the economic conservatives in the country, have been outraged over his policies,” says McDonald.

“He has, since then, made more and more overt outreaches [to evangelicals] and had more policy initiatives that we can actually see in the daily headlines. In fact, after my book went to bed, as the New Year dawned, since then I just keep thinking: I wish I was writing for a newspaper. Every day, almost, has a different headline, especially with the G8 initiative.”

She’s referring to Harper’s insistence that abortion will not be a part of any maternal health initiative presented at the G8 meetings in Ontario next month. She also highlights the end of funding for KAIROS, an ecumenical aid organization that was critical of Israel. Evangelicals are the fiercest supporters of Zionism, believing that the Jews must reclaim their homeland before Jesus can return, kill all of the non-believers and whisk the faithful up into the sky.

But these are only some examples.

“Instead of just listening to them, he has actually welcomed them to VIP receptions, he has invited them after the budget and throne speech,” says McDonald. “Two of the groups have passes, which is extraordinary. And he’s sent letters of support to their rallies, when he’s been so careful not to show the mainstream media any religious inclinations at all.”

“My conclusion is that, yes, he may be an evangelical, but he’s more likely a cerebral Christian,” she says. “This is politics. He’s playing politics with religion and that, to me, is the more sobering aspect of this: that when you go down that route, you have to be prepared for the consequences, which you may not be able to control.”