First, Matt, you don’t understand how an analogy works. Yes, countries are not families. But an analogy doesn’t require the two analogues to be identical. Rather, it merely requires that they are in certain respects similar. And that there is an important analogy here is a standard theme in Catholic and natural law political philosophy. For example, Aquinas says: “The ruler of a household is called father, not king, although he bears a certain resemblance to the king, for which reason kings are sometimes called the fathers of their peoples” (De Regno I, 2). But maybe you’ll dismiss that as silly too. Awful luck for St. Thomas, I guess.
But second, the “family” part of the analogy is not in any case what was doing the main work. Rather, the more important bit had to do with what putting something “first” entails. And the point is that putting someone or something “first” simply does not entail making anyone else a “subordinate vassal” or the like. The family analogy isn’t necessary to see that. For example, if you put your best friend first, that doesn’t entail bullying other people (your dentist, your greengrocer, your next door neighbor, etc.). If you put your dog first, that doesn’t entail kicking other dogs around. And so on. Similarly, putting America first simply doesn’t entail turning other countries into “subordinate vassals.” If this rather obvious point still somehow eludes you, maybe it would help to consult a dictionary and look up “first.”
Third, as to the colonialism of the Catholic empires, that’s a complicated topic, but whatever one thinks of it, winning the New World for Christ is a rather different thing from winning Venezuela for Exxon, or even for the sake of a Pax Americana. And even then it was too often carried out by cruel means (such as enslavement) that the popes and the greatest Scholastics of the time condemned as gravely evil. They were ignored, just as you and too many other Catholics are ignoring the Church’s teaching now. Anyway, since we’re on the topic of silly analogies, I think comparing Trump to Columbus takes the prize.
Fourth and finally, your “against that now” remark insinuates that I’ve somehow changed my mind about something. I haven’t changed at all. You’re mistaking your own movement for mine, like the man on a departing train who thinks the railroad platform is speeding away from him. All I’ve been doing is upholding the traditional teaching of the Church, like you used to do.
Some on the Right are mistakenly concluding that the fecklessness and perfidy of international institutions mean that international law as such does not exist. But law is an ordinance of reason for the common good and therefore exists even when it isn't observed or enforced.
Debate the legitimacy of American intervention in Venezuela, please. It should be debated.
But for the love of God, no matter what side you take, debate it better than this.
It has become apparent that many Catholics are simply not familiar with their own tradition, and have also completely forgotten the Day of Judgment.
Just because something is not enforced here and now does not mean it is not a true law, grounded in divine and natural law, which will ultimately be enforced by the King of kings. Have they not read God’s consistent warnings to rulers who rule unjustly? Their day will come, no matter what nation they come from. Not one bit of injustice in this world will go unpunished, just as not one bit of true justice will go unrewarded.
To argue that something cannot be a law simply because it does not have an immediate temporal enforcement shows a flattening, a naturalizing, a de-supernaturalizing of belief in the apostate “west.” It shows an implicit rejection of the Kingship of Christ (though I am certain this is not intended), and forgetting that His enforcement is the least avoidable of all, even if from our perspective it may be delayed.
This is why the Day of Judgment is so important. Not all law has an immediate enforcement—but that does not mean it isn’t enforced at some point, or that it ceases to be a genuine law. “Ius gentium” is a beautiful jewel in the Christian inheritance. To deny it in favor of pure power is to spit on the Catholic inheritance.
It is clear many Christians have fallen for this siren song of modern power worship, rather than the truth of the Great Tradition, which tells us we must be willing to suffer—even on a cross, if necessary—rather than wield power divorced from authority. That includes temporal rulers. Pagans like Socrates knew this. How sad when Christians forget it. Power is important, yes. But when ripped from the eternal time horizon, the eschatological conclusion of all things, it becomes a false god unto itself.
All of my comments are about first principles, not the specifics of recent events. Far too many are wrong on first principles to make any discussion of specifics helpful. If you get first principles wrong, your prudential judgment about specifics will necessarily err (minus the “broken clock” exception).
I also recommend everyone follow Dr. @FeserEdward.
If you have $0, you get welfare.
If you have $50 million, you get a bailout.
If you have $2,300 in savings, you qualify to fund the whole system and get lectured to budget better.
Pope Leo XIV releases his prayer intention for the month of November, inviting the faithful to pray for 'the prevention of suicide' and for those living in darkness and despair.
The same principle underlies Tolkien's criticism of both the Ransom Trilogy and Narnia. Tolkien thought Lewis didn't write good enough stories in themselves. Lewis sacrificed secondary belief (the quality of the tale) to deliberately explore certain themes or make certain points.
Thank you all for your kind words and messages.
Right now, I’m not in a place to share anything personal,
but I truly appreciate everyone who’s reached out.
We are doing our best to make things right.