Thread by @johnmilbank3

It’s a very penetrating critique and denunciation of totally loopy and wicked suggestions that may still prove dangerous. However JC Murray and Bellarmine are *not* the alternative and liberalism as cult of the individual will is all those real and dominant.

https://twitter.com/johnmilbank3/status/1322101576094416896

The problems here are surely twofold: 1. The ‘integalists’ ironically refuse the integration of nature and grace and so have a modern and heterodox doctrine of the coercive domination of nature by supernature, law by gospel, which then is not the gospel.

2.Inversely the correct refusers of pure nature have since early sixties often inconsistently supported a pure natural and neutral secular liberal autonomy. A ‘left integralism’ after Peguy instead says criterion of just state is its enabling of non-coercive community of charity

Much of William Cavanaugh’s work points in that direction even if he is too anarchy-pacifist with respect to the limited but necessary role of coercion. Andrew Willard Jones is brilliant here. I would call his vision ‘left integralist’.

It’s also the kind of position i have tried to point to from TST through BSO to PofV. Latter is I hope serious critique of liberalism and set of suggestions for how to move to a politics informed by Christian virtue and a fluidity between grace and nature in a contemporary way.

I take it that eg Patrick Deneen does not at all ascribe to Manualist duality and rigidity. I don’t yet know enough about the views of Adrian Vermuele. But much in this new ‘manual’ of integralist politics is as crazy as it is plain appalling.

Anarcho-pacifist.

It does seem just incredibly difficult for American Catholics and Episcopalians to escape subordinating their Christianity to either the Republicans or the Democrats.

All too real and dominant.

On Bellarmine see pp 202-4 of my Beyond Secular Order. He at once too much restricted the plenitude of papal power to protecting Church interests and at the same time thought of it in too modern coercive-juridical terms. Unlike Aquinas. De Lubac said all this.