Catholic Integralism & the
Social Kingship of Christ
*****
Article taken from: https://thejosias.com/2015/01/23/catholic-integralism-and-the-social-kingship-of-christ/
*****
*
Catholic integralism (sometimes referred to as
“integrism”) is today dismissed as a relic of a bygone era which received its
final chance at life through a number of ostensibly misguided socio-political
movements during the early decades of the last century. Though the term
“integralism” would be appropriated and reworked by several prominent 20th
Century theologians, it is largely associated with hyper-traditionalist
reactionaries who refuse to recognize the ideological realignment of the
Catholic Church following the Second Vatican Council. Whether or not this
ideological realignment has been either prudent or wise remains a vexing
question. Serious inquiry into this matter is too often taken as a sign of
flagrant disobedience, and there remain forces within the Church which wish to
uphold that the ideological realignment toward liberalism is the direct result
of, or coeval with, authentic doctrinal development. That thesis has come under
significant and sustained scrutiny in recent years, as evidenced by Pater
Edmund Waldstein’s four-part article, “Religious Liberty and Tradition”
(available here, here, here, and here) and theologian John
Lamont’s paper, “Catholic
Teaching on Religion and the State.” Some, naturally, remain
unconvinced, including those who believe that Vatican II’s document on
religious liberty, Dignitatis Humanae, not only conflicts with pre-conciliar
magisterial statements, but has had the practical effect of obscuring the
social rights of Christ the King. That the Kingship of Christ has become, for
many Catholics now living, a “lost doctrine” is almost beyond dispute.
Nevertheless, as the Dominican theologian Fr. Aidan Nichols recently opined,
“[P]ublicly recognising divine revelation is an entailment of the Kingship of
Christ on which, despite its difficulties in a post-Enlightenment society, we
must not renege.” It is for the restoration of this public recognition that
Catholic integralism continues to strive.
*
*
Contrary to popular belief, Catholic
integralism—or what I shall refer to simply as “integralism” for the duration
of this essay—is not first and foremost a political program. For the integral
understanding of Christianity begins first with the supernatural society
established by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, namely the Corpus Mysticum,
the Holy Catholic Church, which transcends the temporal sphere and has for its
end the salvation of souls. By carrying out its mission in the world, the
Catholic Church possesses indirect power over the temporal sphere which is
exercised for the good of souls. This indirect power in no way sullies the
Church’s divine mission nor dilutes it by way of overextension since the civil
authority retains at all times direct power over temporal matters.
*
*
Sitting at the head of both the ecclesiastical
and civil authorities is Christ the King. Contrary to distortions which entered
the Church’s liturgy nearly a half-century ago, the Kingship of Christ is not
exclusively spiritual. Although Christ’s spiritual rule in this world began
2,000 years ago and can in no way be abrogated, the temporal acceptance of this
rule, that is, the recognition of Christ’s reign in its full integrity and
truth only came about after the course of centuries whereby the civil rulers,
whose authority was never their own and always from God, accepted the divine
mission of the Church and her supernatural constitution. While the nations of
this world have drifted far from accepting this reality, their denial cannot
with any true effect “uncrown” or “dethrone” Christ. His social reign may,
through ignorance or sin, be unrecognized and unimplemented by the present
civil authorities, but they possess no right to do so. As Pope Pius XI made
clear in his great encyclical Quas Primas, “It would be a grave error, on the
other hand, to say that Christ has no authority whatever in civil affairs,
since, by virtue of the absolute empire over all creatures committed to him by
the Father, all things are in his power.”
*
*
Integralism follows this reminder of Pius XI
with the utmost degree of seriousness. Even in the absence of states and more
localized political communities which are fully permeated with the teachings of
the Catholic Church, integralists live out their public lives, be it in the
workplace or the voting booth, under the reign of Christ. That is, there is no
separation between private “religious life” and public “citizen life”; the
obligations in justice which should bind all nations at all times continues to
bind all Catholics, regardless of what the civil authority recommends. While
prudential considerations will affect application, no Catholic businessman, for
instance, holds the right to pay his workers unjust wages simply because
liberal economic ideology equates “justness” with the prevailing market wage.
Similarly, no Catholic politician, regardless of which level of office he holds
(municipal, state, or national), has the right to support immoral laws
legalization, inter alia, abortion, same-sex unions, narcotics, prostitution,
and pornography. Integralism recognizes no right to abscond from moral duty in
the name of temporal convenience.
Here it is important to
stress that integralism is neither romantic nor utopian. On the charge of
romanticism or the accusation that integralists simply want to “turn back the
clock” on human history, it must be said that while there may be some
integralists who believe that something like that should occur, such a
fantastical belief is not intrinsic to integralism. Indeed, a brief glance back
over the last several centuries of papal teachings on religion and society
reveals, at least up until 50 years ago, a desire to maintain an integral
approach to political and economic affairs in the modern world. Given the rapid
pace of change that occurred between the 19th and 20th centuries, the great
popes of the past sometimes felt compelled to address the same topic in a
relatively short time span. For example, it only took 40 years since the
promulgation of Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum for Pius XI to issue Quadragesimo Anno
which both deepened the former’s economic prescriptions while extending them to
a world reeling from the effects of unbridled capitalism and economic
depression. Neither Leo XIII nor Pius XI called for dismantling the modern
industrial machine, intentionally retarding scientific and technological
progress, nor restoring the older system of social safeguards, such as guilds,
in isolation from the economic revolution which had occurred over the course of
the previous two centuries. Integralism embraces timeless principles, but not
without two eyes fixed firmly on the concrete situation which the world finds
itself in.
*
*
As for the claim that integralists are
utopians, nothing could be further from the truth. While an integral relationship
between Church and State reached its high point during the Middle Ages,
integralists acknowledge that this relationship was never perfect and that the
sinfulness and shortcomings of man often undermined the ability of the Church
to fully furnish the world with her treasures. At the same time, integralists
recognize that plethora of non-Catholic forces which continue to conspire
against the Church and the social rights of Christ the King. While these forces
have changed over the centuries, taking on new platforms upheld with fresh
lies, they remain a grave challenge to the restoration of a truly Catholic
culture and a society which radiates with the splendor of truth. It must also
be stressed that a disturbing number of modern errors have made their way into Corpus
Mysticum, infecting both clerics and laity with the virus of liberalism which
leads to the disastrous syndromes of indifferentism and relativism. Integralism
is dedicated to combatting these errors, first for the good of the Church and
her divine mission and, second, for the common good of society which can never
be divorced rightly from man’s intended supernatural end.
*
*
The future of integralism as a significant
force within the life of the Church and the nations of the world is unwritten,
but the principles of integralism, which are bound to the truth of Christ’s
rightful rule in the spiritual and temporal spheres, will survive with the
Church until the Second Coming. The defeatist mindset which holds that the days
of integralism have passed and that a “new order” or “new relationship” must be
established between the Church and the world remains a prevalent temptation;
and like all temptations, which are from the devil, must be resisted. Equally
tempting to integralists is despair. Have the affairs of the Church and society
not become so corrupted with error and moral rot that there is no longer any
hope or, if there is hope, it is in trying to escape the world and pray for the
eschaton? Ah, but no Catholic has any right to despair. None! The integral
Catholic must remain fortified by the messages of light which God, in His love
and compassion for his frail, fallen, and fearful creatures has delivered
through the Church. And above all the integralist repairs to the words of their
savior and king: “These things I have spoken to you, that in me you may have
peace. In the world you shall have distress: but have confidence, I have
overcome the world” (John 16:33).
