Integralists (TM) Are Evil!

What is integralism?

Dunno, and I care less, but it’s been a topic on #CatholicTwitter lately. As far as I can tell it’s what some people call that part of Church teaching (disputed by some) known as the Social Kingship of Christ.


The ins and outs of the degree of authority regarding this set of teachings is simply “above my pay grade” and I don’t have the time or energy to study further. I’m a home schooling housewife, not a theologian.

I have laboured here and there over about 12 years to understand this set of teachings – the Social Kingship of Christ – as well as I reasonably can, given my external limitations, so I’m slightly resentful about committed Catholics who seem to blow this off.


I wrote in a piece a while back, what I thought was a reasonable blog post, about the idea, which I think is true, and which I think I had explained pretty well, that the state is always confessional (update: a confessional state means having a particular religion as the religion of the state). Even when, for that historically very brief moment the state seemed to be neutral, it never really was. For example, it has been a long time that Catholics have suffered under wicked divorce laws.


Indeed, in any state which recognises civil divorce at all, abandoned Catholic spouses are denied justice, both in law, and socially. Such a state is NOT neutral. It is whatever it is – protestant, or some other weird hybrid thing. And in this state, Catholics are at a disadvantage, particularly with the divorce laws. These laws enable all manner of family strife – and legally impose or sanction it at the expense of the innocent – and actively destroy the religious beliefs of Catholics regarding marriage. Nor does it take very long – in one generation everything can change. How nice and neutral!

I’d be very happy never to discuss the topic, except that it does seem to me to be one of those things which some potential converts will have to at least navigate at some point. It could be a block to conversion, and wishing it away won’t do anything, so I have endeavoured to explain it to others as well as I can.

One of the reasons it seems to touch a nerve is that pragmatists seem to think we all have some kind of plan to actually abolish Sunday trading, for example, in spite of such a policy having (allegedly) only 1% of popular support.

No. I can’t answer for other integralists (if that’s what I am) but for me it’s important to know what a just society looks like – in order to evaluate current laws etc. Whether we can change *anything* is another matter. So far, we can’t even prevent millions of babies being slaughtered in the womb, so the disgrace of Sunday trading is not high on my own list of preferred reforms.

Anti-integralists believe we should do the best with the system we have. In fact, I agree with them there, because it’s not practical to do otherwise. But discussions about whether or not certain policies are a help or hindrance to virtue are extremely important, imo. And that’s the value of discussion the Social Kingship of Christ.

Secular society is not neutral, whatever else it is.


I need a drink

This entry was posted in Catholic, God, Our Lord Jesus Christ, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Integralists (TM) Are Evil!

  1. True Faith says:

    I like everything I have read so far (especially the filthy bastard parts) butI still don’t get what you mean by a confessional state.

    • louiseyvette says:

      Yes, I really should have defined that. Sorry.
      It means a state that has a particular religion as its official religion. It doesn’t necessarily mean you have to belong to that religion to be a citizen. It doesn’t have to mean state persecution of non-adherents, either.

      The thesis is that even if there is no avowed official religion, a philosophy or informal religion (eg worship of the environment, or worship of “science”) would certainly become the unofficial religion of the state and enforced by the state in some way. Neutrality is impossible, I believe.

      • True Faith says:

        OK, I understand now. I agree that neutrality is impossible. But it seems to be generally accepted that neutrality IS possible so long as religion is left out of the equation.

      • louiseyvette says:

        Which in reality means leaving religious people out of everything! But actually, I don’t see how the state can even be neutral if the whole population is nominally irreligious. There would just be a conflict of philosophies then.

  2. Pingback: Canon212 Update: On His Own Feast Day, Christ Not Welcome in Francis’s Rome – The Stumbling Block

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s