Table of Contents
Catholic presidents in the White House are rare. John F. Kennedy was the first, Joe Biden the second – both were able to dispel the suspicion that the Pope was ruling in and with them. The Catholicism of converted Vice President J. D. Vance is of a different character.
The media is currently gasping for breath over every new cabinet decision made by Donald J. Trump and is forgetting the most historic personnel decision made by the president-elect: J. D. Vance is only the third time a Catholic has moved into the White House, and one of a different ilk than the one Numbers one and two were. As Irish-born Democrats, Presidents John F. Kennedy and Joe Biden almost stereotypically correspond to the image of politically successful Catholics of their respective generations. Vance, on the other hand, stands for a new Catholic conservatism, post-liberalism.
In his presidential election campaign, John F. Kennedy still had to compete against an anti-Catholicism that used old rites such as the Latin Mass – which were abolished a short time later by the Second Vatican Council. He gave what was probably his most important campaign speech in September 1960 to Protestant pastors in Houston, to whom the charismatic senator assured that he was, above all, an American who, as president, received his orders from the American people, not from the Pope. As a result, he avoided any reference to the church, and the more his lifestyle became public, the more the image of the fun-loving sinner replaced that of the student who had been welcomed into the Vatican with his believing family.
Biden, a “cafeteria Catholic”
Biden, a generation younger, was able to speak openly about his faith throughout his long political career and never had to make a secret about the rosary in his pocket. His Catholicism, however, is entirely in the spirit of Vatican II: liberal, progressive – an American archbishop even said that Biden was a “cafeteria Catholic” who came to mass on Sundays but was otherwise flexible. In fact, Biden’s moral and political attitudes have changed with the zeitgeist, from the young senator who in 1974 still thought that the Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade went too far in liberalizing abortion, the president wanted to enshrine national abortion rights.
By joining the Catholic Church, Vance found an institution that, for him, represented a counterpoint to fast-moving modernity.
Accordingly, not all American Catholics see Joe Biden as “their” president: While John F. Kennedy received 80 percent of the Catholic vote, Biden received 57 percent. This year, a majority of Catholic voters, 58 percent, chose Donald Trump.
Indeed, Catholic voters have long provided a miniature picture of the American electorate in general. In particular, the Catholic electorate has become more ethnically and ideologically diverse. While Kennedy’s generation of Catholics rejected contraception and abortion, today the majority of them support a form of time-limit solution. In strict religious circles, “Joe Biden Catholic” may be a dirty word, but in American reality the president is far more Catholic than most of his fellow believers.
J. D. Vance’s Catholicism is different from this: unlike John F. Kennedy and Joe Biden, unlike the six Catholics on the Supreme Court, Vance is a convert. Through his father, he was active in an evangelical church as a teenager, but became an atheist during his studies. It wasn’t until 2019 that Vance was baptized in a Dominican church in Ohio and chose St. Augustine as his patron saint.
Vance joins a list of influential conservatives who have made their way to Rome at a time when the Catholic Church in the USA is losing believers in large numbers. The “National Catholic Reporter” described the prominent converts as a “Who’s Who of Maga”: The neo-Catholics include the former Speaker of the House of Representatives Newt Gingrich, the opinion entrepreneur Candace Owens, the Fox News star Laura Ingraham as well as the journalist and best-selling author Sohrab Ahmari.
Ideological change
One of the few conservative columnists for the New York Times, Ross Douthat, is not a cradle Catholic, but (perhaps precisely because of this) he repeatedly discusses questions of faith and church policy. Catholic converts have always shaped the conservative movement in the United States, but Vance’s baptism marks an ideological shift that connects him with an emerging conservative current.
Vance announced in an essay in which he explained his conversion that he was joining the resistance. His secularism, his atheism was above all an attempt to belong to the elite. As a child from a poor, broken background, he was a cultural immigrant at Yale University and in the world of finance and media, forced to constantly adapt and reinvent himself.
By joining the Catholic Church, Vance not only found his way back to his faith, but also to an institution that, for him, represented a counterpoint to fast-moving modernity. People need values, namely values that will still be valid in ten years. He also relates his political ideas to Catholic social teaching, which he believes reflects his ideas about the ideal state. At the latest when Vance blames the atomization of society on modern liberalism, it is no longer the convert who is speaking, but the post-liberal.
Ronald Reagan’s presidency was the heyday of conservative-libertarian think tanks. Post-liberals formed under Donald Trump and are now hoping for influence in his second presidency. They are united by the conviction that modern liberalism must be overcome. When Vance laments the “hyperliberal, hyperatomized, hyperlibertarian attitude” that reduces people to “buyers and sellers, economic agents and mere individuals,” one hears the influence of his friend Patrick J. Deneen.
In 2018, the Catholic political scientist wrote the ultimate post-liberal diagnosis of the times with “Why liberalism has failed”. Liberalism failed, Deneen’s core thesis, because it triumphed—it corroded the cultural, ethical, and economic foundations of our community, thereby creating space for an empowered tyrannical state.
In his follow-up book, “Regime Change,” Deneen does not have a convincing answer to this and limits himself to communitarian ideas, that is, to retreat into small-scale communities. Other post-liberals – mostly Catholic – at think tanks such as American Compass or in the magazine “American Affairs” are more specific and want a state that, among other things, pursues an active family policy, protects its borders and turns away from free trade. A considerable number of post-liberal movements also place Catholicism at the center of their ideas about the future.
Pragmatic opportunist
Although still a niche movement, so-called integralism has too much intellectual following to be ignored. The most prominent academic representative is the constitutional lawyer Adrian Vermeule, who teaches at Harvard Law School. He spreads his views, among other things, through “The Josias,” an online publication whose definition of integralism has almost become standard. Accordingly, integralism rejects the separation of state and church, since the latter performs a more important task than secular power: “Since man’s secular goal is subordinate to the eternal goal, secular power must also be subordinate to spiritual power.”
What is required is not the establishment of a church state, but rather the alignment of the state with the (Catholic) Church. In the view of the integralists, it is the responsibility of this state to monitor the state so that it enables its citizens to lead a life pleasing to God. Nobody is forced to believe, but the state has to prioritize believers.
The integralists take their slogan from the Book of Kings: “He did what pleased the Lord and followed entirely the ways of his father David, without deviating to the right or left.”
J. D. Vance won’t take such a straight path. He is committed to post-liberalism, has attended events with integralists and counts leading figures from both movements among his friends. At the same time, Vance has repeatedly acknowledged that many views of the Catholic Church in the United States do not have majority support.
Nevertheless, he will look for ways to implement post-liberal ideas, provided that his essentially powerless role as vice president allows him space to do so. Because in contrast to President Trump, who is not an ideologue and is essentially apolitical, Vance has also found his political convictions along with his faith. Like every (successful) politician, he remains a pragmatic opportunist, but without wanting to lose his compass.
Claudia Franziska Brühwiler is adjunct professor of American political thought and culture at the University of St. Gallen.
**How do Vance’s views on post-liberalism and integralism align or clash with the concerns and values of his constituents in Ohio?**
## Open-Ended Discussion Questions Inspired by the J.D. Vance Article
This article delves into the political and religious landscape of the United States, centering on the recent conversion of J.D. Vance and its potential implications. Here are some open-ended questions designed to spark discussion and explore different perspectives:
**J.D. Vance’s Conversion:**
1. **What factors might have led Vance to convert to Catholicism after a period of atheism?**
– Discuss the role of personal experience, intellectual awakening, and societal influences in shaping religious beliefs.
2. **How does Vance’s conversion reflect a broader trend of influential conservatives embracing Catholicism?**
– Is this a genuine ideological shift or a calculated political maneuver?
3. **What does Vance mean when he describes his conversion as joining the “resistance?” What is he resisting against?**
- Is he defying secularism, modern liberalism, or something else entirely?
**Post-Liberalism and Integralism:**
4. **How do post-liberal ideas intersect with traditional Catholic social thought?**
– What aspects of Catholic teaching are emphasized by post-liberals, and how do they reinterpret them in a contemporary context?
5. **What are the core tenets of integralism, and how does it differ from traditional conceptions of the separation of church and state?**
– Is there a place for integralist ideas in a pluralistic society?
6. **What does Vance’s commitment to both post-liberalism and his pragmatic political approach signify?**
– Can these seemingly contrasting ideologies coexist in his political vision?
**Catholicism and American Politics:**
7. **How has the Catholic Church in the U.S. historically interacted with political movements?**
- What are some examples of this interplay, and how have they shaped the Church’s position in American society?
8. **What is the significance of Vance’s conversion for the Catholic Church’s role in American politics?**
- Will it revitalize the Church’s influence, or further divide it along political lines?
9. **Considering the diversity of beliefs within Catholicism, how can dialog and understanding be fostered between different theological and political perspectives?**
**Remember:** These questions are designed to be starting points for **open and honest discussion**. Encourage participants to share their thoughts, challenge assumptions, and engage with diverse viewpoints respectfully.
