I write starting from the premise that we share the goal of restoring Christendom in and around Cincinnati. This Journal, in part, seeks to chart a course toward that goal. We all approach the question from different angles due to our different natures. I, rather than beginning with a positive vision, want to start by discussing a negative proposition:

We will not restore Christendom at the ballot box, and attempting to do so undermines our efforts.

There are plenty of reasons for this.

First, local political success is increasingly unlikely because Hamilton County is moving to the Left. In the last two elections, Democrats have done progressively better. There are many reasons for that; I am not looking to untangle them here. It is sufficient to observe that a majority of our neighbors responded to the current state of affairs and the promises of Progressivism by asking for more and choosing Democrats in every county-wide 2022 election. In the City itself, the Democrats’ political machine has ruled for decades.

Second, while there is more potential for political success at the state level in Ohio, the Republican political machine is controlled by politicians interested in self-preservation—not the social reign of Christ the King. Better to be ruled by them than by Democrats (at least Republicans come out right on some of the issues some of the time), but the Republican political machine is unreliable and is not our ally.

For example, in April 2021, Ohio H.B. 248 was introduced with the support of 16 Representatives in the Ohio statehouse. If enacted, the bill would have protected individuals against discrimination based on their vaccination status. That was a huge issue at the time. We know people who were threatened with losing their jobs over the COVID panic. The bill would have protected them. But the Chairman of the Health Committee arranged for it to remain trapped in committee, where it died at the end of the last legislative session.

Therefore, in the last legislative session there were (by my count) 16 decent State Representatives (out of 99). I assume some of the 33 State Senators were good as well. Those people do not hold power in the Republican political machine, which can easily sideline them with cloak-and-dagger backroom tactics—like holding up bills in committee, or by denying campaign funding. 

Third, our government and the mechanics of the electoral process make horse-trading necessary, which prevents substantive change. The Ohio General Assembly contains 132 legislators. There are 9 Cincinnati City Council members (8 Democrats and 1 Republican). Assuming that we could find a champion who could win an election, we would get a single seat. Our champion would have a platform—but little more. He could easily be isolated, ignored, or marginalized. 

Worse, our champion could be converted away from our cause. Our champion would be surrounded with career politicians, who would court him for support, suggest that he be “reasonable,” propose that he compromise with the majority’s initiatives, and encourage him to go along to get along. It would likely start with some legitimate principled compromises, but as the habit builds, persuasion becomes easier. Our champion may then determine that it is necessary to make unprincipled compromises in the short term to gain the power to do more good later. The great ends would justify these means. The Enemy is very persuasive. A truly heroic individual might be able to resist those temptations. Most cannot. People often enter politics with good intentions, but rather than converting the system, the system converts them.

Fourth, the previous point simply assumes an election is won—but that is hard work. The entire process is riddled with challenges. Our champion would need to win a primary, and then a general election. Both present significant challenges that are highly variable race to race. That success would then have to be repeated at scale, because we would need a majority of offices to get anything done. We would need many champions to win many elections—which would require a tremendous amount of blood, sweat, and tears.

In addition to all the work that electioneering would require, it is worth noting that although our most recent elections are entirely above suspicion, America’s history is filled with examples of electoral corruption—from ballot harvesting, to vote-buying, to continually re-counting for a desired result. William “Boss” Tweed of the Tammany Hall Democratic machine in New York is the most famous example, but Cincinnati too was once run by a Republican machine controlled by George “Boss” Cox. Both were notorious for their corruption. Fortunately, that is all ancient history and could never possibly happen again.

Fifth, Christianity does not lend itself to democratic politics. Serious Christianity is not very popular, making it hard to use to win a majority. Further, I am not aware of an example of Catholic political success resulting from an election. The historical examples I see are the result of the conversion of kings or conquests in Crusades.

And is Christianity even something that a political movement ought to be built around? In the middle ages, the Church and the State were parallel institutions. The king and the noblemen governed the realm while the Church focused on spiritual matters. Clerics would be present as advisors at court, and the Church was supported and protected by government authorities, but they served complementary roles. While there was crossover, they were not combined.

Christianity certainly should inform our politics and guide our politicians. For instance, St. Thomas discusses how excessive taxation is unjust—so excessive taxes are opposed to Christianity—but what should the tax rate be? He didn’t tell us a number. Pope Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum similarly offers guidelines for a Christian social order in the industrial age, but few explicit proscriptions or prohibitions. 

This is because while government should be restrained and inspired by Christianity, the vast majority of decisions are ultimately prudential matters. There can be an honest, vociferous debate between people of good will about all sorts of issues, recognizing that while our policies should point toward certain ultimate goods, we are restricted by scarce resources and other temporal limitations.

A sixth objection, which draws on the others, is that it would take a tremendous amount of work to launch an effective Christian political movement and there is serious risk of corruption following any success. Think about what would be needed. A single campaign would cost a great deal of time and money. Imagine doing that at scale; it would probably require a political party, or taking over an existing one. 

And what does winning elections get us? A few marginalized office-holders incapable of wielding power and subject to temptations to corruption and worldly praise. Is that worth the effort?

I think not.

Our political system is so thoroughly corrupted that engaging with it earnestly is a waste of time that also places us in a near occasion of sin.

Seeking solutions from electoral politics attempts to defeat the Enemy in a battle on his turf. The current political order created the broken world that we are living in today. Why would it want to undo its success?

This is only a general rule. There are some exceptions. For instance, specific, purposeful engagement with the government (like pro-life work or lobbying to repeal restrictions on chicken-keeping) is more likely to get results. And truly local elections in the independent towns surrounding Cincinnati may be worth participating in, but even then only on a case-by-case basis.

I’m not saying we should do nothing. We just should not put our trust in princes.

Right now we can and should be doing two things:

First, we need to live as Christians. This is the most radical act possible, yet also the most sensible thing to do. We live in an anti-Christian age of apostasy. It needs to end first in ourselves before it can end in others. We all hold views, tastes, or beliefs that derive from the spirit of the age rather than Christ.They need to be rooted out. Continual conversion is required.

Second, we need to develop in-person connections and communities. The existence of the current ruling social and political order does not prohibit us from developing our own. We are free to build a Christian society. We can do it without controlling the government. It starts with having parishes where people actually talk with and know each other, then the creation of informal clubs and groups, then the formation of families, organizations, and businesses.

We have been trained to view America’s government and politics as the end-all be-all most important issues in our lives. Neither are. They don’t matter that much. Our governmental and our political disputes, viewed in the context of history, are embarrassing. 

Let crazy people fight over crazy things. Let us rebuild Christendom. 

Pretty soon, some of those people will see that we are onto something and will start changing their ways. Then, maybe, it would be worth talking about elections.