All the Kingdoms of the World: On Radical Religious Alternatives to Liberalism

by Kevin Vallier

A fresh assessment of Catholic integralism and other new and radical religious alternatives to liberal democracy. According to a common narrative, the twentieth century spelled the end of faith-infused political movements. Their ideologies, like Catholic integralism, would soon be forgotten. Humans were finally learning to keep religion out of politics. Or were we? In the twenty-first century, nations as diverse as Russia, India, Poland, and Turkey have seen a revival of religious politics, and many religious movements in other countries have proved similarly resilient. A new generation of political theologians passionately reformulate ancient religious doctrines to revolutionize modern political life. They insist that states recognize the true religion, and they reject modern liberal ideals of universal religious freedom and church-state separation. In this book, philosopher Kevin Vallier explores these new doctrines, not as lurid oddities but as though they might be true. The anti-liberal doctrine known as Catholic integralism serves as Vallier's test case. Yet his approach naturally extends to similar ideologies within Chinese Confucianism and Sunni Islam. Vallier treats anti-liberal thinkers with the respect that liberals seldom afford them and offers more moderate skeptics of liberalism a clear account of the alternatives. Many liberals, by contrast, will find these doctrines frightening and strange but of enduring interest. Vallier invites all his readers on a unique intellectual adventure, encouraging them to explore unfamiliar ideals through the lenses of theology, philosophy, politics, economics, and history.

Genres: Philosophy, Politics, Religion, Christianity, Nonfiction, History

315 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 2023

Reviews

[Sebastian · Rating 4 out of 5]

Imagine what it would mean to sincerely practice Catholicism. The attainment of grace is not merely a colorful, trad-flavored substitute for mindful meditation. Rather, you would believe the Church has an important role in the political order. You would believe that "the Church creates law and administers grace to secure the salvation of the entire human race" [9]. I am not sure it's too extreme to say you would believe the Pope should rule the world.

While this view seems medieval in America in 2023, the Catholic Church has exercised strong political power for more of its history than it has not. In fact, it was only in 1965 during the Second Vatican Council that the Church adopted Dignitatis Humanae (D.H.), a declaration of religious freedom that formally abjured political ambitions. The Church has only seen itself as a voluntary organization without authority over states for about 58 out of 2,000 years [10].

Integralists like Harvard Law professor Adrian Vermeule believe this innovation is in error. They believe that "God has authorized the church to protect the spiritual common good" and authorized government to "protect the temporal common good" [29], and that "the best regime includes partial subordination of the state to the church, which together form a dyarchy that successfully promotes the whole common good" [35].

All The Kingdoms Of the World: On Radical Religious Alternatives To Liberalism by Kevin Vallier explores Catholic integralism, its history, practicality, and how its proponents should best proceed in an increasingly hostile West.

Back to D.H.: Vallier is clear to highlight just how inconsistent this self-conception is with Church history. Think of Pope Leo III crowning Charlemagne in 800 A.D. [58-9], and the famous Fourth Lateran Council of 1215 which in an infrequently-discussed canon affirms papal authority to dethrone kings [64]. As recently as the early 20th century, Pope Leo XIII criticized secularizing, tolerant American Catholicism:

It would be very erroneous to draw the conclusion that in America is to be sought the type of the most desirable status of the Church, or that it would be universally lawful or expedient for State and Church to be, as in America, dissevered and divorced.... [The Church] would bring forth more abundant fruits if, in addition to liberty, she enjoyed the favor of the laws and the patronage of the public authority" [74].

Most of this book explores further historical justifications for and arguments against the practicality of Catholic integralism's realization in America.

The shortest version of the argument against is that integralism's requisite moral cohesion is impossible to maintain across a broad population. Mounting pluralism can be beaten back with coercion, but coercion only exacerbates moral dehiscence and begets additional coercion. Eventually any integralist project is more likely than not to fall apart (unless you had an insanely fit meme?).

Vallier opposes Catholic integralism, but concludes the Orthodox monks of Athos have a solution for accommodation in the form of "integration writ small". Smaller integrated communities (born of free association, within the boundaries of a liberal society) avoid the problems of pluralism. City states it is! Balaji Srinivasan enters the story when Vallier concludes "Christians should long not for an imperium but for an archipelago" [265-267]. He calls this consensus "postliberal".

-----

Wait a second. Isn't integralism basically what we have in the United States? Isn't liberalism is basically a religion? [125] One could argue that Catholicism lacks political power in the US because we have a different religious authority, but not none at all.

This view can be confused by woke religion -- this is indeed a religion like Catholicism.

But liberalism itself exists on a different axis from Catholicism or Confucianism. Liberalism (especially liberal progressivism) is a force that militates against all stable human organization through the (coerced) enforcement of universal human liberties and / or duties.

Making it less abstract: certain aspects of universal womens' rights make a true sharia law society in the US impossible. Universal rules about abortion start to pressure Catholic nodes. Federal taxation and red tape means fewer groups form and can do less; tax exemption empowers religious groups and enables them to grow their reach and capabilities.

The image that comes to mind is thermal energy in an organic system. If you have a lot of heat (liberalism), you live in a world of little individualist atoms. They can't start to organize to do much together. Maybe the Mormons build a new temple now and again and we have good companies that emerge, but family formation is low and institutions of civil society are everywhere weakening. People write books with titles like "Bowling Alone".

A system without a lot of thermal energy looks like China. You have a crystalline form that is very beautiful and appears to be working well in certain ways. But man, that crystal is getting pressured as e.g. the solvent surrounding it starts to change its pH (changing global conditions). There isn't much it can do to adapt.

Life happens in the middle part of the thermal spectrum. There's enough Heat of Liberalism to clear away the old, prevent some hideous orders from forming, and adapt to changing conditions. But there isn't so much heat that our architecture is ugly and generic, our music is all the same, movies are only sequels, and solipsism stays where it belongs: in philosophy books.

[Tim Shaw · Rating 4 out of 5]

Catholic Integralism is in many ways an oxymoron; it represents itself as an active opponent to liberalism but if it IS Orthodox/non-heretical, it should then be strongly in favor of Pope Francis and his current hold on Papal pronouncements and encyclicals.
This academically focused author who is a Philosophy Professor at Bowling Green State University (Ohio) genuinely engages with anti-liberal spokespersons / online writers - careful framers of plans to engage with rising leaders - platforms that are up for approval or just being imposed by lawmakers who have "super-majorities". Vallier in the preface wants readers to understand a vast historical development / evolution of the future political orders and how "the church" will overcome church-state separations to direct policies as far as marriage / divorce, abortion / permitted contraception, other moral issues it will "solve."
Vast periods of time are covered (Middle Ages, Church councils such as Constance / Trent / Vatican II) and quite a bit of ecclesiology is presupposed for the readers of this 280-page book. I do not recommend it for those seeking to understand JD Vance (Trump's 2024 running mate for the Nov. election) but it has fascinating insights on trends that concern international Confucian philosophy and Islamic thought, political and constitutional/cultural impositions. The chapters are gradual in their coverage ranging from #2 History / #3 Symmetry / #4 Transition / #5 Stability / #6 Justice. I remain pessimistic that "Catholic Integralism" is having a moment in the West just because the OH Senator (Junior in tenure) JD Vance has been elevated by a major donor (Peter Thiel) and an aged Predecessor / Political figure of great controversy (D.J. Trump). The book's epigram is Matthew chapter 4, verses 8 -9 "Again the devil took Jesus to a very high mountain and showed him all the Kingdoms of the world and their splendor; and said to Jesus, "All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me [the Devil]".

[Alex Strohschein · Rating 2 out of 5]

2.5/5.

Kevin Vallier has been one of the most outspoken and relentless critics of integralism, an approach to governance that intimately weds Roman Catholic social teaching to public policy and the law. Although integralism is not a widely held view among Catholics today (and Vallier asserts it has no support from the Church hierarchy), it has been influential in the past, even being held by popes as recently as the 20th century. Integralism has recently seen a revival thanks to the works of Thomas Pink and Adrian Vermeule, who promulgate it through social media and their own networks.

Vallier's book opens with a history of integralism, including extensive discussion of the recent revival, and this was by far the most lively part of the book. In the next two-thirds of the book, Vallier engages in a sustained assault upon the possibility and validity of integralism. He determines that it is entirely unfeasible and that any successful effort to impose integralism upon a modern state (his focus is mostly the USA) would result in undermining other key aspects of Catholic faith, even going against other Catholic social teaching. He spends the last chapter assessing Confucian and Islamic anti-liberalisms. My low rating for this book isn't because Vallier isn't a careful scholar - he knows the content he is interrogating - but because, as another reviewer has already remarked, his book is pedantic and repetitive and unlikely to hold much appeal for readers who are not thoroughly immersed in (largely online) debates about how religious believers should think about the relationship between church and state.

One commendation I want to give Vallier is that he is a generous academic; his footnotes are chock full of thanking others for their input, scholarship, and even challenge that spurred him to tweak and strengthen his arguments.

[Tobyweed · Rating 2 out of 5]

Boring & pedantic. Only got through 3/4 of it for book club. Learned a lot about catholicism though.

Summary of first 3/4: First parts narrate the history of "catholic integralism": the idea that the catholic church should have authority over the government. Proceeding sections discuss the merit of this proposal, both on dogmatic & strategic grounds. This should be scarier (and thus more interesting to read), since the strategic sections are literally a discussion of how catholic extremists can co-opt (or violently overthrow) the liberal world order, but the book's author holds the ideas at an arm's length, making it a purely academic exercise. Also, as far as I can tell, catholic integralism just isn't a very popular idea. The book gestures to some of the "key figures" of the "movement" but most of these people don't even identify as integralists. This reduces the relevance of the content.

Wouldn't recommend.

[Nate Hermann · Rating 3 out of 5]

It's so interesting how the ascendant populist right in America is incessantly intellectualized by writers and academics, either those who seek to yoke the populist energy to their particular project, or those who seek to ascribe philosophical motives to the raw exercise of power. As the second Trump term looks to begin soon, it is worth recalling how many such intellectualizations, whether the traditionalist, Evola-influenced school seen in people like Steve Bannon, the techno-monarchical-liberatarian dreams of someone like Curtis Yarvin, or the Catholic integralist philosophy described in this book, have all been discarded as the useless idiots they are by a political movement in America that is, above all else, a personality cult. Perhaps the cranks and academics will have their day, but I won't be holding my breath. As such, it feel in reading this book that I am reading someones urgent missive against a movement that I suspect will ultimately be stillborn. Much sound and fury.

[Nick · Rating 5 out of 5]

The author of this book presents a steelman of integralism, basically making the state subservient to religion to enforce religious norms and rules. Mainly the author focuses on Catholicism influencing the US though he also discusses alternatives in other countries. At times the arguments get really heady and philosophical and are hard to follow. I would've liked more concrete discussions on the ideas.

By the end he has thoroughly dismantled the arguments in favor of integralism as an alternative to liberalism, but only from an intellectual angle. I worry that he doesn't really consider the emotional side and that it could happen despite the downsides to everyone's detriment.

[Graham Clark · Rating 3 out of 5]

An academic-philosophy look at religious alternatives to liberalism, focusing on Catholic Integralism. Me either. Vallier's main reasons for why these alternatives aren't going to take hold are that the levels of coercion and punishment required fall outside the dogmas and internal laws of the religion. He develops a framework for engaging these anti-liberal ideas. So you can confidently assert why these grand ideas will inevitably fail. While they conveniently set ideals to the side and bash you over the head. I feel like Vallier will be decrying the logical inconsistencies of our new overlords while being burned at the stake. Hopefully none of this will happen!

[Rajat Sirkanungo · Rating 5 out of 5]

The book charitably interacts with views of catholic integralists and general anti-liberalism of the political wings of other religions. It ultimately defends political philosophy of liberalism. One of the best recent defenses of liberalism and examination of social conservative anti-liberal political philosophies. Everyone should read this book! Thank you Kevin Vallier.

[Sam Stabler · Rating 4 out of 5]

Brain breaker in political theory/theology for the religion and politics set. Reminds that today's christian nationalism is only a trace remnant of other traditions' (notably Catholic Integralism) efforts to fuse religious and political life.

[Peter · Rating 1 out of 5]

The libertarian welfare centers that funded this must be wondering if they can’t maybe get a refund

[Aung Sett Kyaw Min · Rating 2 out of 5]

Does it even make sense theologically to speak of 'infusing' modern states with grace? Perhaps the very notion that the state is an 'ideologically' neutral instrument without an internal telos (except that of self-preservation) whose machinery the ecclesiastical authority can simply 'take over' expresses a disavowed secular sentiment. After all, profane self-preservation and obsession with security, order and dominion can be described as an ideological orientation on its own that is neither intrinsically Left nor Right.