Guest Post by The Zman
Integralism, sometimes called Catholic integralism or Christian integralism, is the revival of one of the oldest concepts in Christianity. The very simple definition of integralism is that worship is essential to the common good, therefore political authority, in order to maintain legitimacy, much recognize and promote the religion of the people. Since this is primarily a Christian concept, at least in this context, the religion must be Christianity or in the case of Catholic societies, Catholicism.
At first blush this may sound like theocracy, but that is not the case. Instead, it is both a critique of and reform of liberal democracy. In the most general sense, liberal democracy is a set of rules that ensures that the general will of the people is expressed through the state. In theory, at least, liberal democracy is silent on the nature of the social arrangements of the people, as long as those arrangements are arrived upon through the mechanism of the ballot box and marketplace.
Integralism is first and foremost a critique of this definition of liberal reality. They point out that in every liberal democracy, an ideology evolves to limit the choices at the ballot box and in the marketplace. Homosexual marriage is the most obvious example. The public rejected it, so it was imposed. Often, the liberal-democratic ideology limits or removes choices within the family. For example, parents are forced to put their sons on mind-altering drugs in order to please the public schools.
For the integralists, the first line of critique is observable reality. Liberal democracy, whatever it claims in theory, results in degeneracy and the destruction of the social capital of the people. A system that is supposed to be devoid of morality is quickly consumed by a destructive civic ideology. This defect, according to the modern integralists, is the absence of morality. A system constrained by and subordinate to a Christian moral code would not make war on the people.
The aim of the Catholic integralist is the integration of religious authority and political power. This is not some fringe idea promoted by people living off the grid. Leading integralists include Edmund Waldstein, Patrick J. Deneen, Gladden Pappin, and Adrian Vermeule. Notre Dame’s main journal posted a long essay explaining Catholic integralism a couple of years ago. This was written by the aforementioned Edmund Waldstein, who is a Cistercian monk from Austria.
Catholic integralism has a traveling partner in the Protestant sphere that is called Christian reconstructionism. This is a 20th century movement, rooted in prior reform movements, which argues that modern government should be ruled by divine law, including the judicial laws of the Old Testament. The Christian Right in the United States, the home school movement and various other social conservative movements sprung from Christian reconstructionism in the last century.
The main criticism of integralism in all its forms is that not all people are Christian in modern Western societies. Jews, for example, would oppose any effort to integrate Christian ethics into secular law. Darren Beattie, the right-wing critic of multiculturalism, is very opposed to integralism, calling Vermeule a dangerous joke. Nationalist Yorham Harzony opposes any role of Catholicism in modern society. Neocons, of course, oppose anything with the hint of decency.
From the Jewish perspective, this is not a small thing. A society limited by Christian ethics, even broadly defined, is one that will encourage the inclusion of Christians and the exclusion of non-Christians. Mormons will support their fellow Mormons. Baptists will support their fellow Baptists. Being of the faith will be a qualification for access to power and authority. Jews understand all too well the nature of tribal identity, so they must oppose any role of religion in a society, other than Israel.
There are, of course, secular criticisms of integralism. Right-wing Progressives like David French argue that it is just Christian authoritarianism. It is a curious claim from someone who favorably compares himself to Christ. Civic nationalists and constitutional originalists oppose the idea of introducing morality into the law. They make rather curious claims about the nature of modern society, like we are governed by the written law, in order to defend the current kritarchy.
All of these criticisms of integralism miss the mark, because they refuse to acknowledge the reality of liberal democracy. America is now an ideological state, closer to a theocracy, rather than the liberal ideal. The debate is not about whether the state and its agents, private and public, will impose a moral order on the people. The question is the source of that morality and how will it be imposed. To pretend otherwise is to live in the realm of fantasy. Morality is part of what defines every society.
The integralists, however, come up short and for a similar reason. One big elephant in the room is the open society. You cannot, in fact, have an open society, as it is quickly overrun. The integralist insist that you can maintain the open society, just as long as it is governed by divine law. This is not a lot different from what civic nationalists argue with regards to immigration. If every newcomer agrees on the rules, then why not let everyone move to wherever they think is best for them?
America has a long experience with this reality, as the country has been multiracial and multicultural from the start. Blacks in America are every bit as Christian, more so, in fact, as whites, but the races continue to live culturally separate. The typical black neighborhood is nothing like the typical white neighborhood. Black culture remains stubbornly immune to modernity. The truth is, God may love us equally, but he gave us different continents as homelands for a reason.
The same critique of liberal democracy can be made of integralism, in that both have the same plank in their eye. That is biology. The Christianity of one people differs from that of another people because the people are different. They have a different past, a different set of ancestors and different sense of who they are as a people. The same is true of the people’s sense of civic duty and their relationship to their society. New England remains alien to Appalachia because of biology.
That said, given the choice between integralism and civic nationalism, biological reality will come down on the side of the former. If one accepts that the divine law of one people will differ from that of another, integralism is an excellent critique of liberal democracy. It offers a moral argument in response to the ideological claims of the current ruling elite. More important, those moral arguments are rooted in something with genuine moral authority, rather than the general will.
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal
-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
The author’s premise that using the “Old Testament” for “laws” is wrong. Yes, the Ten Commandments proscribe certain behavior, but the rest of mosaic law relies on a vindictive, vengeful “god” to exact “punishment” on “his people”. That my work fine for jews, as they have their evil “talmud” to rely on, but “for the rest of us, it won’t wash.
Our present troubles are a result of a jewish cabal taking over political decisions in our nominally “multicultural” country.
Tying Judaism to Christianity was a clever trick used by the jews to “cement” their claim to the “land of Israel” and of the covenant, to which I reply, “God is not a real estate agent”.
Jews rejected the covenant when they murdered Jesus Christ. Their covenant with God was then “null and void”.
It is the flawed Schofield translation of the Bible that elevated jews to the status of Christianity’s “elder brothers”, which was then reinforced by the Catholic (flawed) “Vatican II Ecumenical Council” in the 1960s.
I cringe when I hear well-meaning people talk about out judeo-Christian heritage.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
The only common thread between Christianity and judaism may be the Ten Commandments, nothing more.
The god of judaism is a vengeful god, totally unlike the merciful and welcoming God of Christianity.
Christianity welcomes ALL, regardless of nationality or social status, not true of judaism.
Judaism is an insular belief system that shuns outsiders, prohibits proselytization, and promotes a form of supremacy, relegating all gentiles (non-jews) to the status of livestock-subhumans with souls, only to be used for the advancement and benefit of jews. In fact, slavery (of goyim) is still condoned and encouraged in the jewish Talmud.
Jews DID murder Jesus Christ. Sad to say, even the present-day (post-Vatican II ecumenical council) Catholic church has bought into absolving the jews for Jesus Christ’s murder. As always is the case, the jews got others, the Romans to do their dirty work for them, the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. How can Christians have the same values as the Jews; the very people who denounced and betrayed the founder of Christianity, Jesus Christ, and call for his execution (by others, of course, that is the Jewish way). It makes absolutely no sense at all. Jews have no respect for Christianity, for Jesus Christ or Mary, his mother, who are both honored as Prophets in Islam, but instead, Jews spit on hearing their names and do the same while passing a Christian of any kind or a Christian Church in Israel. They have no respect for Christians or any other religion.
It is time the Jewish lobbies and the American Government leaders as well as the evangelical Christian leaders who mislead the poor American young into joining the military and believing that they are doing something for God and Christianity by fighting Israel’s wars were named, shamed and arrested and tried for treason.
Amen.
““God is not a real estate agent”
the old testament is quite clear about the “land of israel”.
The “old testament covenant” was broken when the jews murdered Jesus Christ.
“broken”
I can easily see that, and could believe it. but the text simply doesn’t support that. the old testament is quite clear – no matter what happens or what they do, god will “cast all their sins behind my back” and they’ll be returned. and jesus says, “you will not see me again until you say, ‘blessed is he who comes in the name of the lord'”, the classic second coming announcement. so unless you’re willing to ditch any reasonable reading of the text, or the text itself, it’s just there.
Jesus was a Jew, and he murdered himself by framing himself.
Matthew 26:52: Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.
Obviously not true. Being defenseless is certain death in plenty of circumstances. There are advantages to living by the sword, or the world would be fair and Ted Kennedy and John McCain would not have had such great lives as worms.
Luke 22:36-8: Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end. And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough.
Therefore, Jesus of the Bible knew that brandishing a sword would frame him as an enemy of the state. Jesus framed himself to ensure he would be executed. The Jews are responsible alright: Jesus and his disciples. lol! Square muh Jesus circle. lol I’m pretty sure you are to suffer Jews for their fathers’ sakes, because God does not renege on those who served him well. Muh circle! Muh square! lullzzluzlzlzuluuuzlzlzluzl
The can of worms opened by this OP. Fifty tomes when it’s all over.
Jesus was of the Essene sect, which espoused many Christian-like principles while also conforming to jewish law. As is the case today, jews got the Romans to do their “dirty work” by crucifying and murdering Jesus Christ. Even the Catholic Church tends toward blaming Christ’s demise on the Romans rather than the jews who orchestrated and demanded his death. Pontius Pilate wanted nothing to do with Jesus Christ’s death, washing his hands of the whole affair. The mistake Catholicism and other Christian sects makes is the absolution of the jews for Christ’s death, despite the vitriolic hatred that jews STILL have for Jesus Christ.
The Bible says all those things, but not in isolation. Interpret as you like. Jews have antipathy for everyone else. They presume to rule the world for being special like a liberated woman presumes to be special for having a vagina. They are not just targeting Christians. Like I said, they are beginning the emasculation of Muslims. I had thought that to be impossible.
Actually islam is an offshoot of judaism. Islam also professes supremacy of its own cult, just like judaism. It separates people into “classes” in which certain people are afforded “protection” unlike judaism which professes the superiority of its own people. One major difference is that Islam does show far more respect for Christianity, declaring Jesus Christ to be a “great prophet”, unlike judaic talmudism declaring the Christ is “boiling in excrement for eternity”. Christ’s mother Mary is specifically mentioned in the Qu’ran and given a place of high honor.
Your statement: “Jews have antipathy for everyone else.” You’ve got to be kidding.
“Tying Judaism to Christianity was a clever trick.” Wrong.
“Christianity welcomes ALL.” True, and part of the clever trick.
Jews created Jesusology. They were trying to create a revised Judaism that included ALL. The goy did not take to being included as second class adherents. Saul was recruited to salvage the situation. His solution was to let the goy have their own religion with the proviso and catch that they would later reunite with the Jews. What we have at that point is Judeo-Jesusy values. The headship of the Jews is the whole point! Being tricked by a new covenant is not proof that Jews selling Christianity believed in a new covenant, just their power by narrative. Narrative people want power. The pained reasoning of the OP is an clear example.
Jesusology was adapted and reinterpreted by the goy throughout the Roman empire. Losers wanted narrative relief. They wanted to die on the Roman cross as winners. Roman imperialism shaped Jesusology like it did Rabbinical Judaism. The monopoly of masculinity with the Roman state made Christianity and Judaism effeminate, the former as a submissive bitch and the latter as a subversive bitch.
Emperor Constantine hammered out an orthodoxy to rule the great unwashed throngs of losers who flocked to their prefered flavors of Jesusology, and I’m sure their preferred herds. It must have been easy for Emperor Constantine to leverage cult of personality among the pre-Christian faithful. It took decades for the Roman state to define Christianity. But no matter what, social-engineering Jews and Judaism defined Christianity first. There is no getting away from Judeo-Christian values unless you add even more lies to the pile to get your whichever Christian sect. Christianity is inherently submissive to Jews and to the state, so what better way to introduce ZOG?
Islam also derives from Judaism. It is masculine and overt. Submit or die. Before this recrudescence funded by you and me, Islam favored submission by non-conversion and the dhimmi tax. This time they make dispense with dhimmin for totality, but the Western globalists are redefining Islam as we speak. In 100 years male homosexual muslims will be normal. They know what they are doing. They emasculated us over the last 100 years and have all that practical experience. What to you think Ivanka and Jared are doing with Saudi Arabia? They are emasculating the other men in the world. We are already emasculated.
Young Western white men have begun rejecting Christianity as unsalvagable. They are going back to their heritage beyond Christianity, and since they are Germanic that means German and Scandinavian paganism. It is another renaissance against the stifling nature of Christianity. That stifling nature is Jewish and statist, in that order. The last chapter of Isaiah is the goal. The Book of Esther is the goal. The Book of Revelation minus the last chapter is the goal. You are domesticated helpmates and think you’re masculine. lmao
“The only common thread between Christianity and judaism may be the Ten Commandments, nothing more.”
not even that. christianity is about jesus, son of god, savior. judaism is about jews and nothing else.
“16 And He came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up; and as was His custom, He entered the synagogue on the Sabbath, and stood up to read. 17 And the [e]book of the prophet Isaiah was handed to Him. And He opened the [f]book and found the place where it was written,
18
“The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me,
Because He anointed Me to preach the gospel to the poor.
He has sent Me to proclaim release to the captives,
And recovery of sight to the blind,
To set free those who are oppressed,
19
To proclaim the favorable year of the Lord.”
20 And He closed the [g]book, gave it back to the attendant and sat down; and the eyes of all in the synagogue were fixed on Him. 21 And He began to say to them, “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your [h]hearing.” 22 And all were [i]speaking well of Him, and wondering at the [j]gracious words which [k]were falling from His lips; and they were saying, “Is this not Joseph’s son?” 23 And He said to them, “No doubt you will quote this proverb to Me, ‘Physician, heal yourself! Whatever we heard was done at Capernaum, do here in your hometown as well.’” 24 And He said, “Truly I say to you, no prophet is welcome in his hometown. 25 But I say to you in truth, there were many widows in Israel in the days of Elijah, when the sky was shut up for three years and six months, when a great famine came over all the land; 26 and yet Elijah was sent to none of them, but only to [l]Zarephath, in the land of Sidon, to a woman who was a widow. 27 And there were many lepers in Israel in the time of Elisha the prophet; and none of them was cleansed, but only Naaman the Syrian.” 28 And all the people in the synagogue were filled with rage as they heard these things; 29 and they got up and drove Him out of the city, and led Him to the brow of the hill on which their city had been built, in order to throw Him down the cliff.” luke 4:16-29
Matthew 15: 25-8: But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs. And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table. Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour.
Jews are first class according to Jesus himself, but keep looking for rectitude in the fun house mirror of ye Lord. As a certain pastor hath said, the Bible says lots of things. God is not so clear in his proclamations. Maybe humanity is not the center of the universe and not the measure of all things natural. Maybe you a geeman.
“Jews are first class according to Jesus himself”
yeah, but not no matter what.
“43 Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a [m]people, producing the fruit of it.” matt 21:43
“the Bible says lots of things”
yeah, but if you take it in order and in context it’s fairly clear about a lot of things.
Geeman lies by omission. Verses 45-6: And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them. But when they sought to lay hands on him, they feared the multitude, because they took him for a prophet.
The Jewish establishment were sinners enough to not go to heaven. Big flip. The multitudes under the Jewish establishment and who took Jesus the Jew for a prophet could only have been Jewish. You talk out ye arse.
Regardless, the Christian Bible is self-contradictory. You are not able to divine it’s meaning unless everyone else here can. What a Christian nation to be founded on muh Bible.
“Geeman lies by omission”
we can allow the readers to judge for themselves.
Bingo. Well done.
Of course, some may disagree
This Z-man piece likely flew over the heads of many readers. Me? Oh, yeah, no problem. But I did have to look up “kritarchy”
“At first blush this may sound like theocracy, but that is not the case.”
Oh, yes it is!
Consistent religious orthodoxy by popular agreement is an impossibility and a lie. Your ‘integralism’ is not inherently Christian or Catholic. You can’t water down orthodoxy. Sexual reproduction is not cloning and agreement is not purely voluntary. Muslims have the greatest ‘integralism’ of all. Using -ist and -ism words give an idea no more authority than verbosity. Blacks are black not persons of color or African-Americans. The thesis if this post is tedious and self-contradictory.
Why? Because you need a solution to your political problems that is presumed to require Jesus. You lie to identify the problem of alien admixture and hostility from within, what your Old Testament glorifies in the Books of Genesis, Daniel, and Esther.
The author proposes we introduce morality into law? Morality is claimed to be the highest law, even universal. Can’t morality fend for itself? No, which is why it’s a lie. Furthermore, you cannot enforce intent, which means you can’t legislate intent or even ‘good faith’. Every man with a side arm will do wonders for good faith, but that is not a proposal I have heard.
“The truth is, God may love us equally, but he gave us different continents as homelands for a reason.”
Square that circle, Christians. How many more hundreds of years until you give us your squared away peace and prosperity? Should I aspire to Roman imperialism or to medieval serfdom?
This post speaks of biological truth but eschews the bloody organic process. There is no neat and tidy way to be united in culture. It’s the culture, stupid! It’s the blood and even the bloodshed! We owe. No two ways about it. You have exhausted every other avenue 100 times. Face God’s truth, for God must be what persistently is.
I think there are too many posts on TBP, but I am a failed blogger. I don’t speak on this with authority at all, only needy irritation. I would prefer quality not quantity. Is now the time to entertain diverse opinions? Tedium is not winning, unless it helps me slay the propaganda in your mind.
I’m not crazy about the ads on this site that I seem to be blocking. Another commenter mentioned it. I was redirecting from here to a porn site, so I updated my FF and cleared by FF cache. Seems to have worked. Enjoying the decline involves enjoying the squeeze. Hugs for everyone.
Yours in our blood by natural fiat to my bitter consternation,
—RD
“Oh, yes it is!”
correct.
but it should be pointed out that all societies are theocratic, in one way or another, to one degree or another.
All societies enforce compliance to some degree? Is your morality a matter of degrees of subjugation? Are you the sworn enemy of society itself? Or just societies not your vision of universal society for all? You see. You are a worm. You sell the velvet glove and pretend the iron fist is not there. If your visionary theocracy is challenged, the iron fist is the unavoidable fist of God. It’s never you being a pest. I would rather accept a world of violence and make the most of it for myself openly, which is to say I would cooperate for the progressive application of violence so long as I was included. Selfishness is really a check on incontestable abuse of power, as with your wet dream.
“All societies enforce compliance to some degree?”
yes, including your own society of your own self. you advocate enslavement of women, yes? and you advocate violence against anyone who oppresses you, as defined by you, yes? and not just compliance enforcement, but pre-compliance enforcement – you advocate killing the children of police officers because “they won’t be very different from the parents”, yes?
really, the sole difference between you and oppressive government is whether it’s you or not you.
You put words into my mouth. I would not oppress as much as eliminate. It is well known that progressive patriarchy raises living standards. Women are better off subjugated unless they are liquidating men, but their better off is unsustainable and cruel to those who live thereafter. I am better off when I am producing and creating. That is a difference you cannot fathom. If we have transparency in our conflicting wants and desires, the merits can be known and teamwork can be progressive not regressive, as it is now. You are regressive. We both have never seen winning without discrimination and even extermination. I never said I would not oppress or that oppression is necessarily wrong. One can never square the circle to an oppression free universe for everyone. That is your inane goal. I would have producers eliminate parasites. You would kowtow to dogs that stand on their hind legs and demand their human rights. We grow tired of you (and others).
“I would not oppress as much as eliminate.”
… I’ll take that as illustrating my point.
What point? You would oppress, to wit, torment. You are basically a socialist and communist. That is not surprising given the nature of white men and the white man’s practice of Christianity. Elimination is constant. Many called, few chosen. I sure as hell don’t choose you. Your point is that life is mean and we should re-engineer it. Maybe your God could do that. You’re stupid and anyone with half a brain could read all this and see how your emotional imperative taints every word you say. You clutch a fresh box of tampons for comfort. Comfort is having the power to grab your owned pussy by the pussy. Pussy is property according to the Decalogue. Wahh. Jews have tremedous political power per capita. They must be doing something right. Christians must be doing something wrong. Duh. Knowing you are mortal and being eliminated as inferior brings me joy. Your kind is smegma leaving the stage.
“The very simple definition of integralism is that worship is essential to the common good, therefore political authority, in order to maintain legitimacy, much recognize and promote the religion of the people.”
actually original integralism is that political authority, in order to maintain legitimacy, must mandate the religion of the ruler.
“That said, given the choice between integralism and civic nationalism, biological reality will come down on the side of the former.”
These choices are exclusionary of the choice of Art & Nature.
When timeless women and youthful girls emulate one another using this-is-our-feminity techniques from elegant hairstyles to conceptualizing the processes involved in nearly every aspect of daily traditions, Art & Nature represent morality. This timeless Art & Nature has patterns easily recognisable, as timeless daughters comprehend why, through extensive study of soil science combined with life science, their people, near and distant, have specific shades of bountiful regions naturally highlighting strands of locks of the elegant and brave. These timeless daughters learn from their fathers handiwork tradable in bridle and saddle shops, from their people inspiration musically composed, from their mothers a zest for Art & Nature and from their fathers and mothers together, family aligning from Art & Nature.
uh … what?
I thought you were smart, geeman. Wildhorses is pining for traditionalism and the dictates of nature rather than a bureaucracy of men. I don’t think we need to go back in technology to get back to nature and what is biologically natural harmony. A patch of weeds is a garden that has not yet been weeded and seeded. Muh weeds have souls.
No doubt about, betwixt the two, America would be better off governed by a theocracy rather than the plutocracy that now controls the national and state government .
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
John Adams
E. Michael Jones on the Separation of Church and State
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLV352qTzF0