Progressives believe in “progress,” which, in practice, means extending the “arc of history”—the general tendency of thought and social organization—toward a windowless global technocracy that manages the whole of life.
Many people—including Catholics who merge love of God into a secular version of love of man—understand human goods and the world in a way that makes support for that tendency obligatory. They believe justice and inclusiveness require applying similar standards to everything and ensuring conformity to them. And they believe the way to combine compassion and rationality is to provide for all human concerns through comprehensive organization.
Their highest standards require policies that—whether they recognize it or not—end in global technocracy. To become responsible for the well-being of particular individuals, government must take control of human life. Progressivism sets no limit to that process.
Others reject that tendency because man cannot be regimented without degrading him. Also, human nature is real, and man is an embodied, sexed, cultural, and religious being. Progressives don’t want those qualities to matter in social life. They are messy, and interfere with technological rationality, so they violate their understanding of the good society. To allow them any effect would be cooperation with sexism, racism, homophobia, theocracy, and so on. Hence the progressive view that their opponents, who at best downplay such issues, are simply evil.
Conservatism is less well defined than progressivism, so it’s not surprising that the Republicans, who are our conservative party, have not had a coherent response. They have trouble with what the first President Bush called “the vision thing.” So, for the most part, they’ve accepted progressive standards and language, since these dominate the world around them, and have emphasized realism, good management, and “moderation,” meaning slowed-down progressivism. (How often they actually provide those things is, of course, a different question.)
They have also joined the Democrats in supporting Western liberal triumphalism, the view that the rest of the world must remake itself on Western liberal lines, although the usual Republican version of that has placed greater emphasis on American will and power. And they’ve gained votes by gestures toward the social conservatism of many of their followers, although party leaders have privately looked down on them and their concerns.
These followers have responded to their contempt and lack of vision by complaining about RINOs (“Republicans in name only”), and ultimately by supporting Donald Trump. And Trump does present a vision of sorts: MAGA.
It has never been clear just what an America made great again would look like. Reagan talked about “a shining city on the hill, George H. W. Bush about “a thousand points of light.” MAGA has no such luminous ideals. And it has abandoned basic aspects of social conservatism, a trend variously symbolized by support for IVF, quiet acceptance of “gay marriage,” and making an insult comedian the warmup act for the showcase rally of their 2024 campaign.
At a practical level, Trump is mostly a businessman who likes to bluster and then make advantageous deals. That has some advantages compared with progressivism. He delivered the non-progressive Supreme Court he promised. While he is unrestrained in his words, the wilder comments attributed to him have reliably been falsifications. And, in spite of undiplomatic talk, he was the first president in some time to avoid new wars. If you like to make deals, you do not like wars.
He also has a patriotism that seems real but has something of the football fan feel about it: “We’re number one, win team win!” But “winning” seems to include things that benefit the American people, so even that sort of patriotism seems better than no patriotism at all—a basic problem with progressivism, whose technocratic universalism has no place for particular loyalties.
MAGA is crude and boisterous—but not insane. And successful businessmen usually have an interest in practical realities, so there are grounds for hope that MAGA will promote rather than injure the common good, especially when compared to progressivism, which has lost touch with reality.
At the policy level MAGA seems mostly to mean border controls, less emphasis on global empire and more on specific national interests, economic growth through trade policy and reduced regulation, reversing the gross politicization of the legal system and government agencies, and rejection of wokery and the progressive contempt for ordinary people and ways of thought. These goals seem worthwhile, depending on how they are carried out.
Unlike progressivism, MAGA has no interest in crushing traditional religion and social conservatism. But it has little interest in their concerns, and a weak understanding of the common good. Dealmaking can be useful, but overall strategy requires wisdom, and few call Donald Trump wise. And who knows what deals he may find advantageous or what may be sacrificed to them?
No matter how superior a second Trump administration may be to the alternative, Catholics will find things to oppose in it. But we will see.
However, what to do about the lack of vision which, after all, is the great problem in America today? Many of Trump’s cabinet picks seem more suited to disruption—which does seem needed—than solid or creative leadership.
MAGA supporters hope the movement brings about a fundamental change in direction, and many people sense a new trend toward more natural ways of thought. But such things, if real, are in their earliest stages. More is needed than disruption or even a return to normalcy: you cannot fight a definite vision like progressivism without one of your own.
American conservatives have often appealed to the “vision of the Founders.” That vision accepted the liberal goals of freedom and equality, but also accepted moral tradition, a generic God, and the personal and social discipline required by limited and devolved government as limitations on what those goals meant.
That vision dissipated when the limitations it depended on were no longer accepted. Could it be restored, perhaps through disenchantment with progressivism and the search for an alternative rooted in American history, along with the religiosity and social conservatism of some of the groups constituting the Democratic coalition? The future is unforeseeable, but it seems unlikely. The vision was based on an unspoken consensus that seems impossible to restore in a more contentious age in which much of the public feels little connection to American history.
Something more articulate seems needed. Pope Benedict used to promote natural law, which can be defined and defended philosophically, as the proper basis for the legal order of a secular society. But today all significant centers of influence reject that view as regressive and implicitly theocratic. Clarence Thomas has occasionally spoken in its favor, but he can’t even look to the current Catholic hierarchy for support: a notorious essay, repeatedly praised by Pope Francis and published in a semi-official Vatican journal, denounces Catholic/Protestant cooperation in opposition to abortion and homosexual marriage as “an ecumenism of conflict that unites them in the nostalgic dream of a theocratic type of state.”
So, what can we do?
We cannot and should not stop presenting what we know to be true. We should keep arguing for natural law, moral tradition, the common good, recognition of the limitations on what government should try to do, and ultimately the sovereignty of God.
Our political action should aim to promote those things. That would include a defense of the freedom of the Church and the ability of Catholics to live in accordance with their faith. The situation is difficult, but never hopeless, and we should make the effort.
Above all, though, we should live in accordance with the Faith. That will, as always, be the greatest contribution we can make to the world. If we don’t treat it as the right way to live, why would anyone else bother with it?
Only time will tell how all this will end and what any of it means for Catholic relations to the Trump administration and American political life. The best way to advance any of our goals will often be far from obvious, and legitimate opinions will differ widely. May we remain honest, mindful of our ultimate concerns, and willing to learn from each other.
Politics has divided Catholics. May we find deeper grounds of unity.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
I can foresee some conflict between the Religious Right and Trump buddy tech bro billionaires. And what about “the common good?”
I suspect the upcoming Trump Administration will not be as bad as Democrats fear, but it will not be a “new golden age” either. Reality intrudes on fantasy. Perhaps if he can reduce illegal immigration (he cannot eliminate it), and tame inflation, that will be enough.
This talk of tax cuts for everyone is fantasy. Tax cuts, as advertised, will only increase the deficit. We need to get spending under control. This will require sober judgement and action from Congress. That is a tall order.
I do know that over the past four years of the Biden administration our retirement investments were woefully stagnant. However, since November 6th, our investments improved over $200,000. The ecomomy is improving because investor confidence has increased greatly.
See attached.
Trump warned a stock market collapse if Biden was elected, and the opposite happened. The economy historically does better under the democrats.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/01/investing/stock-market-biden-trump-democrats-republicans/index.html
A cryptic Catholic? Magaism has popularized to the extent it deserves an ism. Although as intellectual Kalb reveals it’s complex. Hard to figure out what it is and what it isn’t. From experience I’ve known managers who had reputations as antiCatholics. Although it became evident we were quite admired. Some confessing they fantasized crossing the Rubicon.
Analyzing Magaism properly means analyzing Trump. On his side, and heavily so is his record on protecting, even restoring Catholicism. How’s that? Start with religious rights, putting the brakes on abortion [although the baby killers are genius at practicing their craft], the capture of the Catholic vote first time in decades. Actually getting our clan to vote against perverse child mutilation and baby killing. Trump sure as hell was better than JFK and Biden. In respect to papal head bumping Biden approaching infinity.
Let’s be realistic. Our nation literally bit the bullet. Had the sniper missed a virtually impossible to miss shot we’d be looking at 4 years of Kamala. All the bad, horrible realities suffered under Biden would putatively be crescendoed. God works in his own ways, at times in history takes someone, seemingly the least likely, foul mouthed womanizer, draft dodger, insufferable self congratulating narcissist – and turns the beggar into a hero. Why? Perhaps to shame those of us who fail miserably.
I can understand voting for Trump as the lesser of two evils, but you appear to engage in a good deal of hero worship of Trump. I find this puzzling.
My comment suggests the antihero.
Our history, by the Bible, is filled with such people who helped turn the tide of the Jews away from evil and toward good. I am not saying Trump is some kind of prophet, but I DO think of King David, who was filled with errors yet turned the tide. And so, frankly since I learned of JFK’s erroneous history, and Bill Clinton’s was simply overlooked in this country (I was amazed then at the lead up to his election that there seemed no concern at all by Dems/Media), I learned that such “foibles’ are irrelevant, that what matters is getting the policies/laws/appointments done that we want done. I am just grateful that the power has shifted in the right direction for at least 2 years, until the midterms when, as is true my whole life, the balance of power will shift some again, and of course in 4 years, who knows what will happen. But I hope that long before then, at least we will have some embedded return to normalcy and sanity, while retaining compassionate love for those who need it.
Dear Father. I read your post and have a concern with your conclusions.
No doubt, we have been through the most divisive and polarizing national election in history. Conservatives and Catholics vs Democrats pro-choice liberals, red vs blue states, Primeval Electoral College voting to discard the popular vote, and the vial rhetoric that is sadly shaping the minds of our children. Our elected officials and clerics must admit responsibility and set a new course.
“At a practical level, Trump is mostly a businessman who likes to bluster and then make advantageous deals”. Trump declared bankruptcy 6 times??
“Trump does present a vision of sorts: MAGA”. Is it MAGA or Project 2025?
“MAGA is crude and boisterous—but not insane?” Enter insane Trump lethal
lieutenants Marjorie Taylor Green, duplicitous Evangelical Speaker Mike Johnson, and many others. Being crude and lying profusely is the Trump mantra. These mindless elected officials are in charge of the US House.
Deadly: Immorality with complicity. Catholic clerics and Trump in broad daylight.
Amazingly, the Catholic Vote website displayed an image of Trump on its home page. I used that site frequently. CV was a conduit for donations to Trump’s campaign. I am no longer a participant.
At the Al Smith dinner in NYC, he questioned the mental fitness of Harris and President Joe Biden, commented on second gentleman Doug Emhoff’s extramarital affair during his previous marriage, and made a joke about transgender women that echoed his frequent mocking of trans athletes on the campaign trail. My Cardinal, Tim Dolan was all smiles and clapped showing his immorality and complicity knowing that Trump is morally bankrupt having a history of most sins against women, even rape. We have ourselves to blame voting, the first time in US history, for a convicted felon!!!
I wrote to Dolan, no response.
My religion is being tested. The lights in that “shining city upon a hill” are dimming.
God bless us with your grace and save America the beautiful.
The electoral college is primeval?
Time to change it! Also set term limits on congress and a one term presidency (5 or 6 years) with no return. Also no private funding for elections for both congress and president. And a very limited executive privilege.Then we can begin to get a more honest and productive government. And last but not least: a good idea to set a not to be changed number of Supreme Court justices.
Well MorganD, I sure wasn’t gonna vote for Kamala. As I answered William, Trump fits the role of the antihero [I do however agree the joke at the dinner about cheating wives voting for him was over the top]. I couched the initial comment with a bit of humor so faithful, distressed Catholics could lighten up a bit. A little well placed humor is therapeutic.
And to cap the subject Pauline mentions antiheroes coming to the rescue. Think of King David, who committed adultery with Bathsheba, Uriah’s wife, then has him murdered. She becomes queen mother gives birth to Solomon. God in his wisdom and justice in order to save many tolerates the sinner. David eventually repented and wrote the Psalms.
Father, I agree that “Catholics could lighten up a bit. A little well-placed humor is therapeutic.” We should not be class specific.
On levity. I have been told that I tell too many jokes. I must have gotten this from my Mom who used to say “Please keep it light and airy”. But, one could quickly become distressed in this world of increasing danger and sin that we will pass on to future generations. With some posts here it appears that the obvious religious and political immorality is “no big deal”, not recognizing that those naysayers might show us a spiritual light and a way out of the darkness.
God bless.
A worthy point. Although in an open forum as we have here with CWR there will be differing, at times contrasting views and varied modes of expression. Whereas a closed forum, let’s say an entirely conservative, or liberal religious forum is not open to discussing contrasting perspectives and an exchange of knowledge and learning.
Your tedious Trump Derangement Syndrome is far more dangerous to our country right now than anything Trump might do. He certainly doesn’t allow the likes of people like you to rent space in his head, so he’s one step ahead of you in that regard. And your DNC talking points are simply absurd at this point. Grow up, seriously.
VOTING IN TRUMP WAS A MISTAKE.
TOO LATE NOW.
🙂
Trump had businesses that declared bankruptcy. He personally did not. Like it or not, bankruptcy and business failure is a part of commerce; and there are different forms of bankruptcy, all designed to have a well-ordered priority of claims.
However, lest we cast stones from glass towers, there have been how many dioceses that declared bankruptcy?
“transgender women”
Even when physically castrated and surgically mutilated; males can only present a poor counterfeit of a superficial female appearance. They cannot dilate, lactate, menstruate or ovulate. Women make similarly poor faux males and the results of “phalloplasty” don’t even begin to produce a simulacrum-even in appearance.
Once healthy organs are removed, the individual is a human annuity for “Big Phrama” and endocrinologists.
The proper term is sexually dysmorphic. We used to understand it as delusion.
Those poor mutilated victims become medicalized for life. So yes, it’s a win/win for pharmaceutical companies.
A feature of the scientifico-technico paradigm is that we are all equal observors in a standardised Universe(set of) But we are each born with unique interprative apparatus that will have a unique set of experiences And with a formative willpower to inform our shared realities and add our tuppence worth and may that be revelatory..But.the new worlld order?… limitation control degradation irrelevance automation… the death of spirit
We read: “Something more articulate seems needed. Pope Benedict used to promote natural law, which can be defined and defended philosophically, as the proper basis for the legal order of a secular society.”
For BENEDICT, conscientious Natural Law can be defended philosophically, but is NOT “articulate.” Rather, it’s more of an inclination or memory. We might even say that the natural-law predisposition is the heart of true “conservatism”—rather than any kind of counter-vision to progressivism.
JOHN PAUL II even said somewhere that the Catholic Social Teaching is the negation of ideology. Instead, Natural Law is the space for responsible freedom; HEINRICH ROMMEN explains that it does not always tell us what to do or how to do it, but instead it tells us more what NOT to do (“The Natural Law: A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy,” 1936/1947 and Liberty Fund, 1998).
BENEDICT: “The first so-called ontological level of the phenomenon of conscience consists in the fact that something like an original memory of the good and the true (they are identical) has been implanted in us [!], that there is an inner ontological tendency within man, who is created in the image and likeness of God, toward the divine…the anamnesis of the origin [!], which results from the god-like constitution of our being, is not a conceptually articulated [!] knowing, a store of retrievable contents. It is…an inner sense, a capacity to recall [!], so that the one whom it addresses, if he is not turned in on himself, hears its echo from within [!]. The possibility for and right to mission rest on this anamnesis of the Creator, which is identical to the ground of existence [!]. The gospel…must be proclaimed to the pagans, because they themselves are yearning for it in the hidden recesses of their souls” (Ratzinger, reprinted in “On Conscience: Two Essays by Joseph Ratzinger, Ignatius/National Catholic Bioethics Center, 2007, pp. 11-41).
SUMMARY: About the “vision thing,” who needs the interior life or anamnesis and memory, or the capacity to recall anything prior to (pick a date!)…when today we all know that “time is greater than space.”
I think if every American Christian (Catholic, Protestant, or Orthodox) started enlarging our “circle of involvement” to the neighbors near us–the house, apartment, farm, trailer, or room to the right and to the left of our own dwelling place–and started doing kind acts, waving and smiling, chatting with the neighbors “over the fence,” inviting our neighbors out or over for a meal or treat, and getting to know our neighbors and helping them with any needs (e.g., mowing their lawn when they are gone), and eventually sharing our faith in small ways with them (e.g., inviting them to our church socials)–we would accomplish more for the Kingdom of God than we do when we put our trust in our political leaders and parties to bring about spiritual revival in our nation. I’ve been doing this and it brings me joy to reach outside my computer forums and interact with real-life people!
Thank you. This makes sense and we can all do it. If enough of us do it, with the grace of God, a turn for the better might be seen. Definitely worth doing eh?
Apologies to the author. I was reading along, nodding my head, but when I got to ” making an insult comedian the warmup act for the showcase rally of their 2024 campaign.” I hesitated, full stop. Why? Because this was, indeed an egregious error, and one vehemently disclaimed by DJT…and not then or now ever intended or taken as the warm up theme of the rally, nor the of the intent of DJT and his voters. On the other hand, why was the comment not continued with “albeit, this seemed to be the theme of both Parties candidates, given that a racist comedian ( George Lopez ) was part of a warmup act for the showcase rally of Harris 2024 campaign”? And, btw, I will add, not once,ever disclaimed or apologized for him. Nor for the many other celebrities with, shall we say, checkered histories..one in jail, as we speak. I dislike gratuitous one sided innuendos that distract from the point of the piece.
Thank you, Pauline. I totally agree. God bless you.
I’m not clear on your objection. Tony Hinchcliffe was brought on the stage early on, he did his routine, he’s an insult comedian. What’s wrong about meintioning that as an indication of where we are as a people and where MAGA is as a movement?
All those who support loser trump are insane. he not only is non republican but also pro-choice. he is not going to keep any promises he made as they were only campaign promises. he belongs in prison! how any Christian voted for him is really sad.
Well, Pres. Trump kept most of his 2016 campaign promises. Why do you think it will be different this time around?
I agree 100% but what choice did we really have as Christians?
That’s a childish question. Is it really not clear to you or are you just being dishonest? Do you really think that the two options were moral equivalents? One party supports the sexualization and mutilation of children and one does not. Isn’t that clear? One party supports lawlessness and open borders and the other does not. Is that not clear to you? One party pursues a foreign policy that is profoundly dangerous, and the other represents a commitment to a strong nation. Both candidates were flawed, as is the case with every election.
It is a mistake to think that progressives, the MAGA crowd, or really any other political group is monolithic and has well-defined, unchanging, and ubiquitous goals. Theodore Roosevelt called himself a progressive. So does AOC. An astute observer might notice that the actual beliefs of Theodore Roosevelt and AOC are ever-so-slightly different.
We have to be able to talk about the world around us. What helps to my mind is to make it clear what we mean by terms like progressive, conservative, MAGA, etc. It also helps of course if our usage connects to current mainstream usage.
he has picked a lot of Catholics for his cabinet and advisory group.
Unfortunately, Conservatism has absolutely no absolute principle apart from society itself. This means it must evolves all its beliefs eventually, following society. Edmund Burke, Russell Kirk and Roger Scruton all reject allowing society to be answerable to natural law. Being “sensible” and “business-like” is nice, but it’s no answer to the crisis of the modern West. Only the universal principles of the non-Enlightenment Christian West can help here. Time to ditch the 200-year old confusion of Christianity with Conservatism, an Enlightenment ideology. The sooner it’s done, the sooner we can start building.
“Politics has divided Catholics. May we find deeper grounds of unity” That is of course the point here. Catholics have been the foundation of the classical social conservative position with regard to virtue and moral philosophy, a philosophy which coincides with the Gospel. Yet, many bishops and priests do not teach the natural law effectively, if at all, even after spending their undergraduate efforts studying it. Politics will continue to divide Catholics as long as it divides the shepherds (and by politics I mean also popularity). Of course, the realization of true unity of the shepherds in the matter of faith would first result in a much smaller Church, and while Pope Benedict XVI explained how this would need to occur, no shepherd seems to willing to realize this for being considered a political failure by closing out his ministry with a smaller (though more faithful) flock.