America and Europe: Where Are They Bound?

"The Christian People (in which both prince and beggar are equally subjects) is superior to every other, in intellectual and moral worth." ~ Dom Prosper Guéranger

From Crisis

By Charles Coulombe, KC*SS, STM

There are parallels and differences between America and Europe—and overall is the mutually shared situation in the Catholic Church, which affects and is affected by the political scene on both continents.

The Christian People (in which both prince and beggar are equally subjects) is superior to every other, in intellectual and moral worth. It carries civilisation with it wheresoever it goes, for it carries with it the true notion of God and of the supernatural end of man. Barbarism recedes; pagan institutions, how ancient soever they may be, are forced to give way. Even Greece and Rome laid down their own to adopt the laws of the Christian Code—the Code which was based on the Gospel. So, too, in our own times, the mere sight of a Christian army, though composed of but a few thousand men, struck terror into the heart of an immense Empire of the East: its Ruler who counts four hundred million subjects and calls himself the “Son of the Celestial Empire,” was so overcome by fear that, without offering the slightest resistance, he fled from his palaces and Capital. Yes—this is the superiority given by Baptism to Christian Nations; for it would be absurd to attribute this superiority to our civilisation, seeing that civilisation itself is but a consequence of Baptism. —Dom Prosper Guéranger

The elections in both the United States and Austria—the latter capping a series of elections on the Continent and the collapse of the German government—have come and gone. There are parallels and differences on both sides of the water—and overall is the mutually shared situation in the Catholic Church, which affects and is affected by the political scene on both continents. There is a great deal to try to understand here, and the almost universal lack of historical knowledge caused by the decades-long collapse of education does not help. Nevertheless, we must try.

No one can doubt that the past century has seen an accelerating collapse of public standards of decency in virtually every nation—and an ever-increasing tendency for that collapse to force itself into private life as well. November 11, 1918, saw not only the end of World War I on the Western Front but the forcing from government of Bl. Charles, Emperor-King of Austria-Hungary, of whom Anatole France wrote: 

This war without end is criminal. What is abominable is that they do not want to end it. No, they do not want. Do not try to tell me that there was no way to end it. Emperor Charles offered peace; he is the only decent man to have appeared in this war, and he was not listened to. There was, through him, a chance that could have been seized... Clemenceau called the emperor a “rotten conscience,” it’s ignoble. Emperor Charles sincerely wanted peace, and therefore was despised by the whole world. A king of France, yes a king, would have had pity on our poor, exhausted, bloodlet nation. However democracy is without a heart and without entrails. When serving the powers of money, it is pitiless and inhuman. 

This last sentence should particularly haunt us today, in the wake of these elections. In any case, President Woodrow Wilson’s insistence on deposing Bl. Charles and his German ally had repercussions, as Winston Churchill observed: 

This war only came because, under American and modernizing pressure, we drove the Habsburgs out of Austria & Hungary and the Hohenzollerns out of Germany. By making these vacuums we gave the opening for the Hitlerite monster to crawl out of its sewer on to the vacant thrones.

Indeed; and this precipitated the Soviet-American dyarchy over Europe, which would last from 1945 until 1991. It caused untold suffering in Central Europe and infantilized the leadership in Western Europe since, despite cosmetic appearances, the real decisions affecting our European “allies” were made in Washington. Communism having stunted Russia even more than the rest of the erstwhile Soviet Bloc, the ex-KGB leadership that would come to dominate had problems of its own. 

Meanwhile, in the United States, given that our elites were generationally evolving into the products of the Counterculture, the fall of the Soviet Union meant the end of their having to pretend to believe in any kind of decency. The practical abdication of any say in political life by the largest part of the Church’s hierarchy after Vatican II reinforced the moral decay of the West, as national hierarchy after national hierarchy refused to mount any meaningful opposition to the ever more decadent behavioral norms imposed by the various national leaderships. There were honorable exceptions among particular bishops and priests, and Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI also mounted the occasional salvo against the “new unhappy lords.” For the most part, however, even that came to an end with the election of Pope Francis.

But as all the world knows, there has been a reaction to all of this in both Europe and America. In the Mother Continent, Viktor Orbán has led Hungary into a somewhat better place than the Left was taking it—and has been constantly accused of being a fascist. Other governments in countries around Hungary seem affected to a greater or lesser degree by his example. The rise of similarly-minded parties in Austria, France, Germany, Spain, and elsewhere has seen the conventional politicians, regardless of their supposed differences, unite around keeping these upstarts out of power. In the case of Austria, despite the FPO being the largest party. The president defied tradition by asking the head of the local Christian Democratic Party—who had presided over an uneasy “black-green” coalition and came in second—to form the new government.
Indeed, from the Eurocrats at the EU in Brussels to the new Labour government in London to the various Western European governments, there is a rising tendency to bend or even break the law in an attempt to bring their various opponents down—from Sir Keir Starmer’s two-tier policing and the arrest of pro-lifers for the high crime of silent prayer outside abortion clinics to the German government’s harassment of AfD party leaders. The ever more hysterical and puerile reaction of the Continent’s political leadership to the rise of what they call the “radical” or “Far” Right is to accuse their opponents of being the enemies of democracy.

The problem with this reaction—infantile as it is (and remember, Western European leaders have not had to deal with major questions of defense, foreign affairs, or world economy since 1945), is that it shall serve only to radicalize both their opponents and the population as a whole. Resolutely ignoring their actual subjects’ growing fears of the Islamist threat within and the flow of immigration, and steadily eroding respect for the law by their misuse of it, they seem hell-bent on empowering those whom they claim to fear. Accuse anyone who believes in normal family life of fascism and you shall create fascists.

On the American side of the water, things are grim but not quite as ridiculous. The last four years have been disastrous—or at least a majority of American voters believe they have been. The idea of four more of the same with Kamala Harris at the head simply did not fly. Moreover, Trump has been handed an enormous victory: in addition to a friendly Supreme Court, the Republicans now have command of both houses of Congress. Like Boris Johnson in 2019, the once and future president now has carte blanche for the next two years. Therein lies the problem.

Since 2020, as all know, Trump has declared himself pro-abortion and pro-IVF. In 2016, he had already declared himself comfortable with same-sex marriage. In a word, although certainly possessed of a sentimental affection for his country, he has no ideological center. This sort of pragmatism makes a kind of sense in business; moreover, it is better than being blindly motivated by a failed and/or false ideology. His opponents are horrified by his victory, and many are sure they shall be sent to camps; indeed, this writer has friends who declared themselves suicidal the day after his victory. 

While their fears are no doubt illusory, so may be the hopes of many of his supporters. Just as Johnson could have undone all the damage Blair and his cronies did to Great Britain after 1997 with a stroke of a pen, Trump, too, for this two-year moment, could heal much of the damage done over the past two decades. BoJo did not and so paved the way for the odious Sir Keir; if Trump follows the same path, he shall doubtless be followed by something far worse.

In the meantime, the European leadership are deeply worried by the accession of Trump in America, even as Orbán and those excoriated by the establishment as “far right” are elated. Sir Keir, who allowed Labour party members to go to the States to work for the Harris campaign, has particular reason to be fearful of the new Head of the Free World. Many believe that had Trump been president in 2022, Putin woud not have attempted the Ukrainian snatch-and-grab-turned-quagmire. It might be that Trump shall bring a peace that shall disappoint both sides but allow the bloodshed to end. But if the chances of World War III with Russia do diminish, those of a conflict with Iran may rise—not least because it is being noised about that the Iranians tried to assassinate the new president.  

In any case, if the more traditional elements of the Right-wing European spectrum—not to be confused with Neo-Fascists, Neo-Pagans, and the like who may also be found lumped in under that flexible title by the establishment—is strengthened by Trump’s succession and propelled toward power, then the American election may have a very positive result in Europe, even if it is fleeting in the United States. But for such folk, an important part of the political puzzle is missing.

At the center of their worldview is the Church. At the moment, as we all know, the Church is a tad distracted from her mission of saving souls. The de jure spiritual head of the Christian people is always the pope of the day. Historically, if he is zealous in seeking souls and defending the rights of God and His Church, he shall inevitably find supporters. Just at the moment, however, the current leadership appears more interested in being accepted by the world than converting it—and seems to try to frustrate those who would attempt such conversion. 

One is reminded of Holy Roman Emperor Ferdinand II, leader of the Catholic side during the Thirty Years War, whom Pope Urban VIII betrayed. Whilst beset by the Protestants, the pontiff urged first the Swedes and then the French to attack Ferdinand, and so prolonged the war and ensured the survival of the Protestant cause. In any case, rather than responding along the lines of the sack of Rome in 1527, Ferdinand simply said, “I shall be the champion of the Church despite the Pope,” and soldiered on. So it has ever been in such times—but it does make those who try to lead Catholic lives somewhat harder.

Part of the great, unspoken problem with the West today is precisely that the Mother Continent, whence our Faith, culture, and much of our DNA have come, is in the subordinate position situation she is in, and two of her daughter countries —the United States and Russia—continue to dominate her. In no small part—as with the overthrow of Bl. Charles—this is due to the loss of the Faith that created her, and whose pride and glory it was to pass on to her daughters. In the 19th century, in his Liturgical Year, Dom Guéranger predicted that Europe’s ruin would come to pass should she lose the Faith: 

And we, the western nations, if we return not to the Lord our God, shall we be spared? Shall the flood-gates of heaven’s vengeance, the torrent of fresh Vandals, ever be menacing to burst upon us, yet never come? Where is the country of our own Europe, that has not corrupted its way, as in the days of Noah? That has not made conventions against the Lord and against His Christ? That has not clamored out that old cry of revolt: Let us break their bonds asunder, let us cast away their yoke from us? Well may we fear lest the time is at hand, when, despite our haughty confidence in our means of defense, Christ our Lord, to whom all nations have been given by the Father, shall rule us with a rod of iron, and break us in “pieces like a potter’s vessel.”

So it has proved, and all unknown and unrecognized by ourselves and our Russian counterparts, we have been the rod of iron. But it has done neither of us any good, and as we too have abandoned the Faith, we may presume similar treatment to our original homeland’s. But it need not be thusly. Sooner or later, the Church’s leadership will regain its evangelistic zeal; if they are met by a laity ready to cooperate in the great work of conquering the world for Christ, who knows what might be accomplished? In the meantime, we must come to see the Church and the lands she created as our common homeland. As Otto von Habsburg said, “in reality, Europe extends from San Francisco to Vladivostok.”