Hang tight while we fetch the video data and transcripts. This only takes a moment.
Connecting to YouTube player…
Fetching transcript data…
We’ll display the transcript, summary, and all view options as soon as everything loads.
Next steps
Loading transcript tools…
Catholic Social Teaching and Conservatism Today (Dr. Bracy Bersnak) | Christendom College | YouTubeToText
YouTube Transcript: Catholic Social Teaching and Conservatism Today (Dr. Bracy Bersnak)
Skip watching entire videos - get the full transcript, search for keywords, and copy with one click.
Share:
Video Transcript
[Music]
Welcome to Christian Conversations.
Together, we'll explore the wisdom of
the Catholic intellectual tradition,
engage with thoughtprovoking ideas, and
uncover deep insights into the perennial
questions. We're thrilled to have you
with us. Let's dive into today's conversation.
conversation.
Well, it's a great pleasure to welcome
Dr. Bracie Bersnack to this Christendum
Conversations. Um, you are the chair of
the department of political science and
economics here at the college. Um, so
thank you for making some time to talk today.
today.
>> Thanks for having me.
>> Could you say a bit about about your
background, sort of your journey,
intellectual, personal, how did you how
did you get to where you are now as
being a professor of political science
and economics?
>> Sure. So um I so I'm from Ohio
originally went to Miami University in
Ohio and
um during a summer internship in
Washington DC
I encountered the interccogiate studies
institute and uh became very interested
I was already interested in politics and
conservatism uh but I became and I was
searching for intellectual conservatism
uh and that ISI really exposed me to
that and then um I became very
interested in the question of how the
church relates to modernity and
>> which is a pretty pretty you know broad
question but that uh you know I wanted
to go to to graduate school to think
about that some more I didn't have a
Catholic uh undergraduate education so I
wanted to go to a Catholic graduate program
program
>> and ended up at CUA in DC uh starting
out in the intellectual history uh program
program
>> so I uh did that completed my master's
degree and I enjoyed it. It was a really
good program, but you you know in
history you can just kind of describe
things. You can't really answer try and
answer some of the
>> uh problems that you're formulating. And
um so I switched over to political
theory then and got uh masters and then
eventually PhD in political theory. And
um I did six continuous years of
full-time graduate course work which is
more than really one ought to do but uh
the good thing about it was that I was
able to uh take so obviously I had the
degrees in history and and political
theory but then I took a lot of
coursework in philosophy and a lot of
coursework in theology. So it was very
uh I made a very interdisciplinary sure
program for myself and um in fact now
they have a track in Catholic political
thought that in some you know kind I
don't know how strongly resembles what I
did but I think it captures that that
idea. Um uh so yeah, so that's that's my
intellectual background and I've always,
you know, um been I guess my two main
scholarly interests are philosophical
conservatism and then Catholic social
thought. Uh both, you know, what uh an
unoffici you know what uh scholars say
about it and then of course also what uh
the magisterium has to say about it.
>> Yeah. Well, I want to talk about
Catholic social thought. Um and but
let's start with philosophical
conservatism. So can you say a bit about
that? That's a term you hear a little
bit less frequently but it's very much
present in so much of our lives. Oh
yeah. Yeah. Can you say a bit about
that? And
>> yeah because there are different species
within that. Sure. And uh so
>> Sure. You know, obviously the um the
great history of postw World War II
intellectual conservatism is George
Nash's book and he's of dealing with the
you know postworld war II cold war era
>> and he says that there are three main
strands of intellectual conservatism.
There's traditional conservatism,
uh, classical liberalism or, you know, libertarianism,
libertarianism,
and then more sort of national security
or anti-communist conservatives.
conservatives.
>> Uh, and then of course there's the the
attempt to to fuse these to make a
coherent uh political program for
practical purposes. And then that kind
of comes undone um in the postWorld War
II era once the Cold War is over because
the common enemy that all these groups
um uh agree to despise isn't there
anymore and some of the more the
philosophical tensions come out you know more
more
>> in the postcold war era and so uh you
know I mean there are attempts at being
made at a new kind of fusionism but I
don't uh I think people are kind of
comfortable disagreeing and not having
necessarily a uh a coherent theoretical
program that's practically possible and
all that ends up getting define. You
know, the theorists can come up with
their ideas of what intellectual
conservatism is. And then
really the popular perception is
determined by who's leading the party,
you know, at a given moment. So, uh, and
and just the the sheer fact of Trump,
uh, being nominated and then being the
dominant figure in the Republican party
for so long has changed the theoretical
debates within intellectual conservatism
because it's changed what people
perceive to be politically viable.
>> Yeah. So that's so I think so yeah you
have lots of I mean I think it's it's it's
it's
more interesting now intellectually
because I think there are more wide
ranging debates on the right than there
were in say the you know Bush era. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> And I think you can get down to the core
philosophical disagreements more quickly
and there's less of a concern with
practical applications.
>> Yeah. Well, I um a friend of mine was
involved in um I had a couple friends
and colleagues who were involved in the
first national conservatism conference
in DC. And
>> so I went down and security was was
pretty tight. Um you had to apply to
even be able to attend the conference.
>> Um I think the opening speech was
essentially, you know, basically saying
if you're here and you're a racist and
you're, you know, what a fascist, you
need to leave because this isn't what
this is about. And I had never been to
anything like that in my entire life.
But there was a sense that um what they
were trying to do is formulate some kind
of coherent political philosophy around
this phenomenon Trump. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> And and there was there was like what
are we what does this mean? We want to
understand it. And there was
>> um there were there was an attempt to
create some kind of coherent frame. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> And the nation seemed to the idea of the
nation seemed to be one of the only
tools that to do this. And I had you
know I had you know there was seems to
have been a time in history where the
nation state was the enemy if you will
over against the church. Um and and now
it was being put forward as being a bull
work against the international order. >> Yep.
>> Yep.
>> And so something is something like the
nation state. How depending on the
historical context how you understand
this. Um and then
>> so it it was a remarkable event. I will
say I I ended up going um again uh last
year not not in 2025 and 2024 but in
there wasn't nearly as much heat around
it all because things had sort of
settled down and there was a kind of
consensus that was sort of emerging.
>> Yeah. Um, but I didn't have quite the
carnival atmosphere. Um, and I remember
having there were reporters speaking to
me at the very first conference trying
to what is this about? What brought you
here? And they just couldn't figure any
of it out. Um, but within a couple years
it seemed like the theorists had begun
to catch up.
>> But there are also tribes that, you
know, oppose national conservatism as a
sort of movement. So it's it's not, you
know, in any way homogeneous either.
>> Yeah, I think that's right.
>> Is that so is that sort of how you're seeing?
seeing?
>> Yeah, I think that's right. I actually
uh went to the most recent NACON in DC
just I was only able to go for uh for a day.
day.
>> Uh yeah, I think I think you're right. The
The
>> it's you know and this takes me back to
graduate school. You know, when I was
starting out in uh I started in the
history program in 99,
nationalism was like was considered like
the worst evil that was,
>> you know, politically, right?
uh because nationalism means Nazism
which means the Holocaust and
>> uh and so obviously there are good
reasons for people to be skeptical of of
nationalism but
>> I think what you see with the initial
reaction to national conservatism is
that it it became a trigger word and
still is a trigger word you know for people
people
>> um whereas for really for the national
conservatives it means uh a you know a
strong nation state anti-globalism
defense of legitimate defense of
national uh and local culture. And um I
mean that I mean the irony too is that
what passes for nationalism now would
probably be much more liberal and
watered down, you know, compared to what
people would have thought of as
nationalism even 50 years ago. So >> yeah,
>> yeah,
>> so I I think it's it's been very healthy
and I think again I think people on the
left are obviously still not persuaded
and that unfortunately may never happen, right?
right?
uh and they have political reasons for
not wanting to be persuaded or not
wanting to recognize it for what it is.
But um I I think it's it's I think it's
something that's also curiously enough
united conservatives from uh around the
Western world. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> Because they're all uh rejecting globalization
globalization
uh or or let's say globalism.
um they all want to defend their
countries and their uh national cultures
and uh and we you know face similar
threats. So it's an so it's a very it
was it's actually you know in my
experience a pretty international uh
group at these conferences.
>> Yeah. The netcon have been taking place
around the around the world and the fact
that some of the leaders are maybe the
most prominent leader is actually Jewish.
Jewish.
>> Yes. Exactly.
>> That's no that's the irony. It took an
Israeli to write a book called the
virtue of nationalism and re
rehabilitate the idea. Yeah.
>> Yeah. Well, and I think around the same
time uh Rusty Rino's book, The Return of
the Strong Gods, came out and this idea
that there are these
>> certain forms of association that are so
hardwired into us
>> and certain loyalties and loves that if
you try to
>> if you try to suppress them for some
sort of global order and and and erase
them from human experience, they're
going to come back and they're not going
to be in a very pretty form when they do,
do, >> right?
>> right?
>> And so we need to make peace with some
of these, you know, these things. a love
of country, you know, um,
>> for example.
>> Um, so how does Catholic Catholic social
thought fit into this? What does it
bring to the table in these conversations?
conversations?
>> Well, I think, um, I think Catholic
social thought could stand to do more
reflection on the nature of the nation actually.
actually.
>> Um, I have a friend who wrote a
dissertation about this recently. uh
because the church quite understand I
mean the church is attracted to a universal
universal
understanding of politics because the
church is universal
uh we believe in the unity of the human
race and then we have this idea that
everyone is can know and and follow
natural law and then we have the
historical experience of uh political
Christendom which perceives itself as
being a universal kind of polity in a
loose uh sense and and there are good
reason you The popes
had good reasons for wanting to limit
the pretensions of the nation state in
the 20th century. Very very good reasons.
reasons.
>> But I think you know at at this point
certainly by the late 20th century early
21st century there's been kind of an
inattentiveness to these issues. So I
mean John Paul the second talked about u
the nation quite a bit because he
himself was right
>> an ardent Polish patriot and thought
about this a lot and helped
>> you know appeal to uh Polish not just
Polish Catholicism but Polish national
culture as a way of resisting Soviet
domination of uh Poland and in Eastern
Europe. Uh so that that's something
where I think there's there's room for a
lot of development actually in terms of
philosophically trying to understand the
nation within this more universal
context of um Catholic thought and I
think actually Hzone you know the author
of the virtue of nationalism is a little
bit skeptical of that because of these
universalist you know tendencies within
the church. So, um, so I think I think
there's there's room for more to be done
there. And then obviously it applies to
the way that you think of things like
migration, right? And, uh, whatot?
>> Yeah. Yeah. For those who are maybe new,
um, to Catholic social thought, can you
provide just a sketch? What are the what
are the sort of principal
>> values and perspectives that are being
brought? When I say bringing them to the
table, what are we bringing to the table?
table?
>> Yeah, sure. So uh people usually say
that the four uh main principles are uh
the dignity of the human person, the
common good, social justice and uh solidarity.
solidarity.
And so with the dignity of the human
person of course with the you know
Botheus's definition individual
substance with a rational nature
>> uh and that the you know everyone has a
baseline of human dignity that has to be respected.
respected.
uh but but we have this idea that the
individual is uh we're we're social and
political animals. So we find
fulfillment and moral perfection even in
political community uh and in subsidiary
political you know let's say subsidiary
societies like the family, the church and
and
>> and what have you. And that's where you
get the principle of subsidiarity then
that recognizing that each of these
societies within the political community
have to have uh that they're that they
are real social entities and that they
have to have uh legal recognition and
rights in order to uh function. So each
if you if you look at the and Russ
Hitinger is the guy who's who's really
um brought this out in in several
essays. The popes use the term uh in
Latin munus or muna uh plural in uh
magisterial documents to describe the
you know offices, gifts, roles or
services. Usually a lot of times it's
translated as function that um all these
different social entities have. So vigil
has c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c
c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c
c c certain right
>> the family has certain muna you know if
you look at John Paul II's apostolic
exhortation on on the family familiar
consortio this the subtitle is on the
moon of the Christian family so it's
pops up and even if you look at canon
law too it deals with all these things
>> so the interesting thing about
>> the munraa is that principles like
subsidiarity and social justice This exist
exist
to respect and protect the muna that in
here in individuals
>> and groups
>> then uh what you know if you talk about
solidarity solidarity is a nice term
because it has the resonance with the
>> uh solidarity labor union and Poland
from the 70s and 80s
>> uh and it's it's really it's a kind of a
civic uh friendship suffused by charity
>> I think. So those are what you know I
think I gave more than four principles.
Those are the basic uh principles.
>> Yeah. Yeah. No, that's helpful. And I I
think um you these are it's a dynamic
situation in which we're we're living.
Um and so we're bringing these to bear
on on on things as you say like
migration. Um you know, but you've also
got questions about you know, just war. Mhm.
Mhm.
>> Um uh we've got um we've got questions
about, you know, we're expecting a an
encyclical perhaps or a document of some
kind from Pope Leo on AI,
>> you know. Um and uh so but it's your
it's your sense that these that these
these values, these principles are
really sort of perennial. They can be
they can be applied to all of these
things. Um
>> are there any particular challenges that
you see sort of on the horizon? Like you
know AI is one of them. I mean,
obviously you're not you're not
ghostwriting this encyclical for the
pope right now, but but um how do you
see some of these technologies like AI
and other things? How
>> you know, how do we think about these
things in terms of the Catholic social thought?
thought?
>> Sure. Yeah.
>> Well, I think this whether it turns out
to be an encyclical or whatever on um AI
or on technology, something that's been
coming for a long time. If you look at
uh John Paul II in labor exerts on human
labor has a long discussion of
technology and and how it affects us and
you can find it pops up in you know lots
of other places too.
>> So I think it'll be useful to have a a
more systematic treatment of these
issues. I'm sure it'll be broader, you
know, dealing with technology and not
just AI. But I think uh one of the
things that the Pope has expressed
concern about is how
>> uh this will affect the labor market.
You know, like certain uh kinds of job
will either become superfluous or
there'll be less demand for for people.
I mean, that's already starting to uh to happen.
happen.
>> Um so that'll be one practical problem,
social problem. But then there's also
the way in which these technologies
affect the way that we think which I
think is more fundamental and more
problematic. They shorten our attention
span. They uh give you know things like
phones are designed to give you a buzz
to keep you attached to the phone >> right
>> right
>> um which then further shortens your
attention span and >> sure
>> sure
>> can prevent you from being engaged with
the people you know actually around you.
Uh and then you you know we see this
actually with all these um or at least a
lot of these uh mass shooters or
aspiring mass shooters. They they seem
to spend way too much time online and
get down sucked into these
>> these holes on the internet. So So I
would I would expect that any document
he issues would would deal with those
>> kinds of problems because they're pretty
universal. I think we tend we probably
have the problems worse here in the
states because we're richer, we can
afford more devices and so we're more
plugged in. And I think we and as
Americans, we always we like technology
a lot, you know, and we always want more
of it. So I think we're more uh we're
pretty susceptible and less on, you
know, on guard against the dangers of
technology than we really ought to be.
>> Yeah. Well, we were talking about this
before we started recording a bit.
There's a sense in which Catholic social
thought even though its history it can
have it kind of has a prehistory but
then it has a a more articulated and
well- definfined history in more recent centuries
centuries
>> but then in a way it applies to almost everything.
everything. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> You know if it's if it if the if a human
being is involved >> Yes.
>> Yes.
>> then Catholic social thought has can be
present and be applied.
>> Um you know so that you that's
fascinating. And is if we go back to the
political again um there has been within
Catholic circles for a number of years
questions about you know sort of the
post-liberal you know what's coming
after liberalism is liberalism dead is
it you know what's and if so what's
going to come after >> um
>> um
>> I would hope that the the church's
teaching has some guidance for this as
well um can you say a bit about sort of
how you see the landscape right now and
and how this teaching can can guide us I
mean if if we go into sort of a more
fragmented you know order.
>> What are the principles that should
guide that? You know, that's been worked
out in various films and various novels
about what this could look like.
>> Um, but what is it what does it mean to
think with the mind of the church in
this context?
>> Well, I think um to frame this
historically, I would go back to World
War II and you know there's the church
in the 19th century and the first half
of the 20th century the and this is
still the case today, right? is that
it's the same as uh the position of
Aristotle and Aquinas which is that you
can have whatever kind of regime as long
as it serves the common good and it
could be government by the one, the few
or the many as long as it serves the
common good. The church you know was
fine with that. uh but there wasn't a
there w was not so there was openness to
popular government or democracy on the
part of the popes in the 19th and first
half of the 20th centuries but those
regimes were not maybe as popular among
Catholic intellectuals and there weren't
a lot of successful uh I mean there were
successful political movements but there
weren't really good good examples of successful
successful
polities that were based on some a kind
of proto-Christian democratic uh
philosophy of politics uh and then What
you see in World War II is Pius I 12th
in order to combat totalitarianism, both
communism and Nazism
really embraces democracy basically
because you can have uh free elections.
You have the principle of uh written
constitutions and and rule of law. You
have the the principle of uh individual
rights which are are protected. So the
the idea is that then these mechanisms
protect against uh the dangers of totalitarianism.
totalitarianism.
So in that sense that the popes
beginning with pest the 12th really
embraced liberal democracy and that
really has continued down to the present
right even though after um you know the
sexual revolution of the late60s they
become more critical and you see that
and John Paul II's evangelium vite and
and other places where they're really
scathingly critical of
>> uh liberal democracy but that's because
they're not living up to their promise
to protect
human rights of the unborn and
increasingly the aged and infirmed. >> Right?
>> Right?
>> So this liberal order
a certain liberal understanding of this
order would be that this is just a
natural direction that history is
progressively progressively moving
toward. Right?
Um whereas in fact it probably was more
of a product of a hedgeabonic American
power. I mean at the end of of World War
II the United States produced almost
half of all the wealth that was produced
on the planet.
>> So we had a lot of power to force people
outside of the you know Soviet block to
do what we want and and impose our
values. And I think uh you know we're
still a little bit I think we're you
know a little bit under 25% of of global
GDP. So we're still number one um there
and we have the most influence. But I
think with we we basically experienced
imperial overreach in the Bush era with
the Iraq war and spent trillions of
dollars on that war and the war in
Afghanistan. I think there's uh there's
fatigue with with this and we also I
mean I think what what you see with
economic globalization and the
offshoring of all these jobs and then
the rise of uh this phenomenon of uh
workingclass people who don't feel like
they can get jobs then they don't get
married and then they don't uh they
don't get married so they smoke more,
drink more, do drugs more and die
younger. it creates all all these, you
know, or contributes to all these
serious social problems. So, I think we
we've realized that there are the
economic order that we created through
American power has negative tradeoffs
for a certain segment of the population
and we spent a lot of money militarily,
>> maybe needlessly enforce this this
order. Uh so I think there's I think
there's less willingness uh among the
American public to spend uh money to
preserve the global you know liberal
order and so that's that I think is is
receding and I don't really see that
that's going to how that stops right
Europe you know Europeans still believe
in it but the reality of it is the
European economy is has been stagnant
since 2008 and they don't know how to
assert themselves uh internationally
without us leading the way. So that's a
long-winded, you know, historical
approach. But I think so I think the the
problem is nobody knows what what to do
with this, right?
>> And I don't think I don't think uh
philosophers have exactly figured it out
aside from just saying everyone's going
to do their own thing now and try not to
fight, right? And still
>> that last part's a little disturbing.
>> Yeah. Exactly. But uh and I so I I think
the the church I think is still also in
this in the idea of we want to preserve
international order because it's it's
peaceful. Obviously the popes like uh
the free movement of labor around the
world, but I'm not I'm not sure that
it's that that sustainable or that
practically speaking that that it will
it's certainly not going to endure the
way that it has endured since the end of
the Cold War. Put it that way. Yeah,
that's interesting. Well, and I think of
two things. I sort of think of the sort
of the the um the the person who wants
to read more deeply in the tradition. Um
you know, do you just do you just keep
reading and rereading the city of God,
Augustine, you know, is that is that the
solution? It's good for the soul. It is
good for the soul. Um and uh you know,
but then I also think about, you know,
families, parents trying to guide their
um their young person. Um
>> I remember in 2020, um one of my kids
was really waking up um politically. was
of age and and you know there was the
the there were the you know Trump was
going to be the nominee for the
Republicans. There were all the
Democratic primaries um
>> going on. So there was a lot of a lot of
speeches um available on the conventions
um you know there was you know we were
in the middle of co or COVID was was
getting going um uh the emergence of
Black Lives Matter. There were all these
things happening. I remember trying to
help my uh member of my family. Yeah. um
navigate these things as as and so um so
there's sort of the the intellectualist
sort of I want to read a lot of
interesting things but then there's sort
of the practical you know how should we
vote you know and and what should we get
involved politically and how does that
so there's sort of both aspects and then
I think of all the sort of sources that
are coming to the front door of a lot of
people you in addition to sort of the
the talking heads on television and
>> um you know you've got you've got sort
of this movement for integralism with
among Catholics you have you got the
Claremont review you've got you've
Straussians, you've got you've got all
of these these these streams and
threads. How do you navigate that and
and do you you know both on sort of the
intellectual side and sort of
cultivating your own interior reflection
and thought about the political order,
>> but then also how do you draw the
practical lessons out for people who are
just maybe they're not that interested
in political philosophy or political
theory, but they just they just want to
be a good citizen. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> And they want to think rightly about the
world. So given all of this variety, all
of these these different opinions, when
I was a young person, it was really, you
know, Republicans and Democrats.
>> Yeah. you know, and and and it's so
complicated now,
>> and you you want to think like a Catholic,
Catholic,
>> but you know, how do you how how do we
navigate this?
>> Yeah. Yeah. Gosh, that's a big question.
Um, so I I'd say one thing you have to
do is uh be a good reader of news. >> Okay.
>> Okay.
>> Uh, and to read to read broadly. Um, I
mean, I think the the thing that I
always recommend to people is realclearpolitics.com,
realclearpolitics.com,
which will give you both sides of
>> of an issue. It's it's it's right
leaning though so you get uh
conservative views are pretty well
represented uh there but I think you one
one thing that I observe in a lot of
people is we get trapped in narratives
and we can only interpret things most
people I mean I think about politics for
a living you know so um most people
don't have the time or the interest to
do that and so it's easier to I let's
think of it this way I think in
narratives in the in the areas that I
don't actually know anything about
something Right. Because we have to we
have to you know to organize our
thinking about Yeah. Exactly. Exactly.
And so a lot of people do that and then
the problem is they can't think outside
of the narrative. So
>> narratives are you know don't
universally apply to uh actual empirical
uh political events. So I would say be
open to thinking outside the narrative
so you're not locking yourself into
something that's wrong just because it's
consistent with some assumption that you
have. Uh and then I I you know in terms
of Catholic social doctrine I would say
read the writings of uh Russ Hittinger.
You know there's the new volume on the
dignity of society that's come out. Uh
there's that collection uh the first
grace on natural law. And I think what
you get there, the the thing that he
does uh so well is look at these things
historically and recover their
historical context and then he looks at
them in an interdisciplinary manner.
Right? So he's great at bringing the
history, the political theory, the
philosophy, and the theology to bear on
all of these issues. And again, not
being too preoccupied with the obvious
specific contemporary issues, but there
you get a broad or orientation that's
historically grounded and how the church
has thought about these things for the
last uh couple hundred years. And then
uh and then I you know I I would say
read that and then you should be able to
figure that should teach you how to read
encyclical as well. >> Okay.
>> Okay.
>> You know for example
um that's a uh so those would be my two
I mean that's two recommendations to to
a big question but that was a big
question. It's hard. Uh I think it's
hard for pe you know if it's not your I
mean I guess that's why I did this for a
living is because I
>> I have to figure it all out as best I can.
can.
>> Yeah. Yeah. That's that that's good
direction. And over the years teaching
students and and introducing them to
this tradition are are I mean in a sense
are the students that you're teaching
now are they facing new challenges to
think clearly about politics or are they
sort of this perennial challenges and
and is it more complicated to guide them
through this landscape? I think there's
that's a good question. I mean, I think
um I'm not sure that it's any more
complicated. I mean, if it's more
complicated now, it's just like we were
saying before where conser there was a
kind of conservative orthodoxy before
Trump, right, that people pretty much
stayed within uh and now that's kind of
blown up. And so now you do have more uh
like post-liberal, you know, approaches
or integralist approaches among
students. I just try and get them to to
think about these things historically.
And I think you, you know, once once you
go through the history thoroughly and
you teach them how to read the
documents, they can, my hope is that
they can think for themselves once they
graduate. I had a really I mean she's
not a good example cuz she was a valid
Victorian but I I had a student um tell
me several years ago that she was you
know an encyclical came out that she was
not sure that she was going to be
thrilled about and uh but she said I I
read it uh with the tools of
interpretation that you taught us in
class and I wasn't intimidated by it and
everything is fine and now I know how to
understand the way that they write and
the levels of teaching and
>> and so on and so that uh that's I try
and teach them again kind of the methods
and tools and habits of mind that they
need to
>> to interpret the documents. Um, and that
they can if they take that with them,
then they should be able to pick
something up in the future and and you
know make heads or tails.
>> Yeah. Yeah. So, I'm going to ask you to
go out on a limb. Um, so you get a a
phone call from a staffer at the White
House and um and the president, whoever
that president might be at any given time,
time,
>> um, has just discovered this thing
called Catholic social thought and and
and and needs a, you know, a brief
tutorial because he's got some big
decisions he's got to make.
>> Um, what what what do you say? What
advice do you give?
>> Oh my goodness. Uh, well, again, I'd
probably recommend an essay by Russ
Hitner or something or or a video.
>> Talk to Russ.
>> Yeah. But you Yeah. Yeah, you called the
wrong guy actually. No. Um, no, I would
try and go over the basic principles
with a focus to whatever issue they had
in mind, like if it was just war, you
know, or something like that.
>> Um, I think there's an interest, you
know, there are a lot of Catholics in
the current administration and I think
there's an interest in the way that the
church thinks about these issues and
among high ranking people in the administration.
administration. Um,
Um,
so that gives me, you know, that's
somewhat encouraging. Uh, and I think
it's possible to approach these things
at a philosophical level that's pretty
straightforward. I mean, you don't have
to be a Catholic to get the Catholic
understanding, to intellectually
understand the Catholic position on life
issues. I think that's pretty
straightforward, particularly for
someone who's, you know, a Republican or
a conservative.
>> Do you think the center is going to
hold? I mean, we're we're going through
a period of of pretty intense division
>> and we've you and I have talked at
length after some of your travels this summer,
summer,
>> you know, about the situation of Europe. Yeah.
Yeah.
>> versus the United States, you know, are
are you you know, a lot of this has to
do with temperament and I realize, but
you know, it's it's
>> do do you sense that we're going to be
able to find a way forward? Um, you
know, when I I think it was maybe 2024
the film came out, civil war, and it was
about, you know, kind of a, you know,
fantastic imagining of
>> of the US breaking apart into different
regions and and and and fighting and
there was a Trump-like figure that was
in the White House. Um, do do you have a
sense that, you know, are we going to be
able to find our way back or or and and
and also maybe in in relation to Europe
because the news coming from there is
not necessarily positive.
>> I'm I'm more optimistic about the US
than I am about Europe. I think we're
just, you know, we're more religious as
a country. We're more conservative as a
country. if uh you know our migration
problems are different. You know,
they're not as as serious because uh
people from Latin America can assimilate
much and want to assimilate uh much more
readily. Um so we have problems there,
but it's not they're not the same deep
cultural and religious problems that you see
see
>> in Europe with uh Muslim migrants. And I
and I think there's frankly there's just
you I mean what you've seen with the
Trump phenomenon is a political will to
do something about the problem of
migration, right? And you're not seeing
that in in Europe and most places
unfortunately. And in fact, what's
happened is the government in places
like Britain or Germany has been
weaponized against people who want to
even just speak about these problems. So,
So,
>> and then the the danger I think for them
is that the worse the the more out of
touch elites are on these issues and the
worse they allow these problems to get,
the worse the outcome is going to be.
you know, you have problems in um uh
these countries like Britain or Ireland
where the government plays a huge role
in the housing market in a way that it
doesn't, you know, here. So, if you're
providing public housing uh for poor
people in your country
uh and then you're giving some of that
public housing to uh migrants from
abroad who haven't paid into the system,
don't accept the same cultural values or
even, you know, sexually assault members
of your society.
>> That's a recipe for social unrest. And
you're starting to see evidence of that
in these places. So, and again that it's
it's
only, you know, those this the unrest is
only going to get worse as long as the
elites who are in power refuse to reject
recognize the seriousness of these
problems and
>> uh and do something about it. And I just
don't I don't see that yet in some of
these places.
>> Yeah, that seems to reflect what what
I'm hearing from other people as well.
And you know, we've mentioned the
Catholic social thought is a tradition.
We've mentioned St. Augustine just in
passing. One person we haven't mentioned
is Alexis >> Toqueville.
>> Toqueville.
>> Um, and you know, I know that his
writing has been a rich source of for
reflection on politics particularly in
America and for those seeking to renew
society. Can you say a bit about Alexis
Tukville and and sort of, you know, is
he still relevant? Should we be reading
him? Oh, absolutely.
Democracy in America has been called the
best book about democracy and the best
book about America. And I think that's
true. And I I think just continuing on
the theme of of you know the church, he
has some interesting writings on uh
Catholicism in the United States that
are really geared toward a his French
audience, right? Because in the after
the French Revolution, there's this big
debate that really goes on to World War
II about whether uh Republican
government is intrinsically hostile to
the church uh or or whether these two
things are uh reconcilable. and he saw
that uh Christianity and democracy and
freedom were reconciled happily in the
US and was trying to get his friends in
France to to look at us and cons
consider embracing
uh some form of you know more popular
government and reconciling uh with that
and in France. Uh he also has some
interesting views about
the role of the church in a democratic
age where you know European Catholicism
was very much defined by the
aristocratic culture of Europe and had
uh we you know he he says this really
fascinating thing that he doesn't
develop very much that he says
Catholicism is a religion of forms
>> and some of these forms he says it's
difficult sometimes to know which forms
are essential
>> and which forms are inessential. And the
problem is in a democratic age, people
don't like forms. They don't like too
much uh ritual. And he says the church
is going to have to uh
>> interesting to to deal with this. And I
think it's I think he really put his
finger on something there in terms of
the culture of the modern world which he
attributes to democracy and that there
would be a tension between this and the
kind of again the as he says Catholicism
is a religion of form. So which ones are
essential and which are are inessential?
I I think uh
>> I think it's a yeah it's it's always I
wish he had written more about it but I
I think that he's on to something there.
>> Okay. All right. So, we need to read
Russ Hinger. We need to read St.
Augustine. We need to read The Great.
And then whatever Russ Her tells us to
read, we'll read that and then we need
to read Alexis Stokel. So, uh,
>> good. Well, this is great. We could talk
for a lot longer, but um, our time is
up. But, um, thank you so much for your time.
time.
>> Thanks for having me. It's been fun.
>> Thank you for listening to Christendom
Conversations. If you enjoyed this
episode, be sure to subscribe and leave
a review on your favorite podcast
platform. To learn more about
Christrysin College and its mission,
visit us at christryendum.edu. edu.
Until next time, may we all continue to
seek the truth, live the faith, and
Click on any text or timestamp to jump to that moment in the video
Share:
Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds
One-Click Copy125+ LanguagesSearch ContentJump to Timestamps
Paste YouTube URL
Enter any YouTube video link to get the full transcript
Transcript Extraction Form
Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds
Get Our Chrome Extension
Get transcripts instantly without leaving YouTube. Install our Chrome extension for one-click access to any video's transcript directly on the watch page.
Chrome Extension