In 1943, Lebanon gained independence and implemented a sectarian power-sharing structure across all levels of the government. Early nationalist figures such as Charles Corm embraced Lebanism, which paralleled Zionism in its call for a state for a minority religious group within the region. However, the borders of the young nation-state included numerous peoples of differing religious beliefs, which made such a goal unfeasible. Instead, a negotiated system of representation guaranteed the protection of Maronite hegemony within the nation, while also according power to other religious groups in lieu of civil law. Its most palpable manifestation was the verbal agreement known as the National Pact that dictated the apportioning of parliamentary seats and government positions by sect. Through this accord, Lebanon instituted a system guaranteeing representation for religious minorities and conferred Maronites privileged status. However, the sectarian system allowed elites from across sects to maintain hegemony. Over time, the sectarian system was increasingly out of sync with national demographics, and the rationale for preserving sectarianism shifted from needing to maintain Christian hegemony to enriching the nation through pluralism. My paper explores the evolving parameters of Lebanese discourse of sectarianism as political practice. Using the presidential speeches from the founding of the first republic to the start of the civil war (1943-1975), I examine the changing conditions that modulated sectarianism. The second Lebanese president Camille Chamoun invoked sectarian tropes to justify his power, while naturalizing Christian Palestinians to bolster the Christian population. In his presidential speeches, Lebanon was a nation-state imbued with Christian symbols. Lebanon’s shared Christianity with Europe, in his discourse, configured the nation as a unique entrepot between the Arab Middle East and Europe. Following the 1958 Lebanon crisis that led to Chamoun’s leaving office, subsequent presidents sought to preserve the sectarian system that protected Christian primacy in the state, while being inclusive of all citizenry. Resultantly, presidents such as Fuad Chehab and Charles Helou spoke of a Lebanon that drew upon previous sectarian logics but repackaged them to be non-denominational. Chehab and Helou in addresses to the military, parliament, and foreign dignitaries talk of a pluralistic Merchant Republic rooted in a shared history of trading and guaranteeing religious freedom. The shifts in Lebanese sectarian praxis represent how justifying the laissez-faire economic system through a pluralist discourse became more desirable for elites than erecting a state promoting the interests of Christians above all.