On Valentine’s Day, February 14, 2025, Vice-President J. D. Vance gave a historic speech at the Munich Security Conference. First responses from the elites he spoke to and from the legacy foreign press, and then our legacy media were ferocious. Calling the speech ill-timed, out of touch, and repulsive to our allies, the critics almost universally condemned both the speech and Vance. Then, other voices from other media and ordinary Europeans crept into the public sphere. Brilliant, much-needed, historic, said these critics. Indeed, some said that there has not been such an important oration since President J. F. Kennedy’s “Ich Bin Ein Berliner” speech to Germany so many decades ago.
What Was Vance’s Point Of His Speech?
Vance is a novelist, not just a politician, and as such, he can speak basic home-spun language that is easy to understand and interpret. What his audience heard from him was a strong critique of their values. He told them they had lost their way and were retreating from the real values that made Western Civilisation strong. He focussed most intently on what he called their dismissal of the right to free speech. He found Europe’s governments to be censorious, stifling creative thought and stilling multiple voices. The people attending the Munich Security Conference thought they were going to hear him speak about the dangers of Russia, the War in Ukraine, and how the United States was going to once again lead with money, arms, and people in the defence of Western Europe.
They were sorely disappointed. Instead, Vance told them to grow up, shoulder their share of the burden, and made it clear that the United States would not be the war chest for Europe anymore. President Trump has long been vexed, as have others in the United States government, with Europe relaxing while America defends them. Trump is a big believer in fairness. He does not want to desert Europe, but he no longer accepts America as carrying the main burden of Europe’s defense. Vice-President Vance made that clear in his speech.
Reaction and Meaning
It took Vance’s listeners by surprise. Indeed, some were reduced to tears! If ever the appellation of the colloquial term “snowflakes” was appropriate, the elites’ reaction at the conference showed that the term fit them like a glove. Then, when Vance launched into what he thought the real danger to Europe was–namely, the loss of free speech and the desertion of recognizable Western values, the elites were further scandalized and outraged.
But Vance was exactly right. He showcased the banality and shallowness of what passes for character, integrity, and leadership in the European community today. He points out the objective evil present in the ethical stance of the European countries. It was almost as if Vance was applying the moral of C. S. Lewis’ science fiction novel, That Hideous Strength, written so many years ago. Lewis also tabbed his country’s and Europe’s leaders with the same critique. In that novel, he characterized modern evil as sucking the life out of the human spirit and making men and women hollow shells of banal thoughts and superficial feelings. The fight for humanity’s soul in that tale was the fight against such specious “virtues” taking hold of civilization. Whether he knew it or not, Vance was echoing Lewis and sounding a great warning to humanity. Evil’s power might seem to rest in Russia and the War in Ukraine, and surely, they are real examples of suffering and wrongdoing. However, says Vance, if we do not hit the rot of evil at its source, humanity will be unable to stop that war and suffering. That source of evil lies in Europe’s adoption of values gone wrong, wokeness gone destructive of fundamental human virtues, and the adoption of a pseudo-tolerance that opposes individual humans’ ability to express themselves freely and creatively.
Some thought Vance’s examples were just right-wing screeds on abortion, faith, and support of more right-wing forms of government. However, they were wrong in focusing on the examples while missing the main point. Arresting a man silently praying 500 feet from an abortion clinic and prosecuting him as a person of hate-speech and intolerance was less about abortion than the free speech Vance was emphasizing. I wished he would have used the term ‘the oppression of tolerance’ to point out that the elites’ idea of tolerance as the ultimate virtue is just a canard covering the elite’s wish to control all thought and public expression. Tolerance is not a virtue. It is a neutral action that can be easily turned into good or evil. To be helpful, it must be demoted from the ranks of values and virtues.
Ordo Amoris–The Right Action Of Love
What is most impressive about Vance’s speech and its consequent effects is that J. D. Vance, a recent Catholic convert, epitomizes precisely what Vatican II thought the laity should be doing: concretizing Catholic thought and values in the public sphere. He did that extraordinarily well. However, it is disappointing that much of the criticism against him came from some Catholic leaders and commentators. Pope Francis is not enamored with what Vance has said in his public role as a Catholic vice president. He and others took Vance to task when Vance schooled the world about what St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Augustine said of the Ordo Amoris–the Order of Love. He pointed out that we first care for our relationship with God, self, family, neighbors, and then with the stranger. Vance was speaking in this case about illegal immigration, but Vance did not, as the Pope surmised, mean that one should take care of the immigrant last. He just wanted people to understand that there is a way to understand immigration from a Catholic perspective that also honors a nation’s right to protect itself and its members. In our big Catholic tent, the Pope and Vance believe the same thing but emphasize different aspects. That’s okay and is part of what Catholic laity is to do in bringing values into the public sphere. We debate and discuss until we get things right.
Never since the Kennedy era have we seen such a Catholic entrance into public policy. However, it is so new and different to see Catholicism get such exposure from a powerful and important leader like Vance, even if the details of his views need to be tweaked and nuanced. This example of the Catholic vice-president is a good thing. The reason why so many people are talking about what Vance has said concerning Catholic thought and about the values or lack of present in Europe is because he used Catholic theology as a firm platform to base his views. It made his words powerful and effective. How refreshing! It bodes well for the future as Catholics like Vance become ever more comfortable with the truths present in the Catholic faith and Catholicism’s importance in the public discussion of humanity’s future. The elites of Europe, many of whom have embraced atheism or agnosticism, were blind-sided by a new public voice, a new leader unafraid to use the foundation of his Catholic faith to express a direction that the moribund leaders of Europe could never fathom. The Church should be proud of the growing confidence of the laity to speak the truth of Jesus Christ to a world desperate for direction and meaning.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In