Integralism’s False Promise

Catholic integralists such as the Harvard Law professor Adrian Vermeule and the Cistercian monk Edmund Waldstein argue for a society ordered toward the supernatural end of union with God. While the state should direct citizens toward natural virtues (something the liberal state refuses to do), the Church alone can foster supernatural virtues. Being good, integralists believe, requires both kinds of virtue. The two polities, Church and state, remain separate, but the Church directs the state where needed to promote the Catholic faith. This coordinated separation, Vallier writes, means that “the church has the right to rule the baptized, the state has the right to govern its citizens, and the church has the right to direct the state in a confined range of cases.” Vallier tries to take integralism on its own terms and evaluate its most compelling form. He takes seriously the integralists’ historical claim that the Church has long supported integralism and that Vatican II did not reverse this. He also takes their logic seriously. If our goal is truly to make people good, then we cannot bracket off the supernatural virtues. If we agree with integralists that “union with God is the greatest good of all,” then our politics should aim to promote this good. Vallier is unafraid to engage with integralism and to delve into the reasons for its increasing appeal. A good liberal himself, he believes in the marketplace of ideas and the possibility that honest argumentation can make a difference.