Neo-Integralism

Last updated on November 17, 2025

This is a primer on Neo-Integralism.

Neo-Integralism (or Catholic Integralism) refers to a contemporary intellectual and political movement, primarily composed of Catholic academics and writers, that mounts a fundamental and sophisticated challenge to modern liberal democracy. It is often discussed under the broader label of postliberalism, which integralism is a strain of.

The movement seeks nothing less than regime change—the peaceful but vigorous overthrow of what it views as a corrupt and corrupting liberal ruling class, followed by the creation of a post-liberal order guided by Catholic principles.

Core Definition and Principles

Neo-integralism is rooted in a specific vision of Catholic political theology that rejects the separation of the state from spiritual concerns. It can be defined by three core theoretical claims:

1. The Teleological Mandate (Ordering Man to His Final Goal)

Integralism asserts a stringent teleological mandate for political rule. Unlike liberal systems focused on procedural fairness or individual autonomy, the function of the state is to order man to his final goal. Since man has both a temporal (earthly) and an eternal (supernatural) end, the common good secured by the state must ultimately be oriented to the highest of all human goods: life with God. This pursuit of the common good must override abstract principles of individual liberty.

2. The Doctrine of the Two Powers (Subordination Principle)

The foundational doctrine is the theory of the two powers, asserting that God has authorized two distinct authorities to govern humanity:

Temporal Power (The State): Rules in earthly matters and secures the natural common good.
Spiritual Power (The Catholic Church): Rules in spiritual matters and secures the supernatural end of salvation.

Crucially, Integralism insists on the Subordination Principle: since the church’s objective (salvation) is the nobler end, the temporal power must be subordinated to the spiritual power. This relationship is sometimes compared to the union of the soul and body in man.

3. Religious Coercion and Differential Rights

This subordination principle has profound practical implications for religious freedom and coercion:

Enforcement Against the Baptized: The Church may direct the state to assist in enforcing Church law against its baptized members, imposing civil punishments for offenses such as heresy or apostasy. The state acts as the Church’s secular arm.
Immunity for the Unbaptized: Integralists maintain that unbaptized persons (such as Jews, Muslims, and Confucians) are immune from religious coercion. This leads to the observation that Integralism prohibits assigning equal rights to Catholics and non-Catholics in crucial cases. This selective coercion creates the “Baptism Dilemma,” which critics argue makes the integralist position internally inconsistent and unjust.

Critiques of Liberalism and Modernity

Neo-integralists do not see liberalism as merely a rival political view but as a comprehensive worldview that is intrinsically hostile to authentic religious life.

Liberalism as a False Religion: Proponents like Adrian Vermeule describe liberalism as an “imperfectly secularized offshoot of Christianity” that operates as a kind of “anti-liturgy” or even a new religion with its own dogma.
Rejection of Autonomy and Equality: They critique liberalism for elevating individual autonomy and egalitarianism above communal needs. They argue that liberalism’s commitment to equality and individual rights leads to the disintegration of culture and societal decay.
Rejection of Neutrality: Liberalism claims to be a neutral arbiter but is, in fact, a particularistic ideology. The principles of political liberalism, such as public reason, marginalize those they label as “unreasonable” if they do not leave their deepest normative commitments in the private sphere.

Contemporary Context and Political Strategy

The modern movement is characterized by its reliance on intellectual elites and its strategic alliance with the anti-liberal right:

Intellectual Leadership: Key figures include professors such as Adrian Vermeule (Harvard Law School), Patrick Deneen (University of Notre Dame), and journalist Sohrab Ahmari.
Intellectual Lineage: Their concepts trace back to continental European reactionary thought, notably citing Carl Schmitt (the Nazi jurist), Joseph de Maistre, and Juan Donoso Cortés. Schmittian anti-democratic thought also influences the Dark Enlightenment movement, creating parallel authoritarian intellectual streams—one religious (integralism), one technocratic (NRx).
Legal Innovation: Vermeule has developed “Common Good Constitutionalism” (CGC), a framework that reimagines the purpose of law away from defending original intent toward enforcing a collective common good and harnessing state authority to serve those causes.
Political Strategy: The movement advocates for seizing government institutions from within to impose a post-liberal order. They seek to use a muscular government that they control.
Political Alliance: Integralism functions as a current of post-liberalism that contributes intellectual weight to the broader National Conservative movement, which favors economic populism, unapologetic social conservatism, and isolationism. The Dark Enlightenment also feeds into this movement through tech billionaires and the Thiel-Vance-Musk network, representing a parallel secular-technocratic stream alongside integralist religious authoritarianism.
Illiberal Models: Neo-integralists often praise illiberal foreign leaders, such as Viktor Orbán of Hungary, as providing a viable model for a post-liberal state.

Integralism and the Katechon

The concept of the katechon (the restrainer) from political theology is frequently invoked in the intellectual sphere integral to this movement.

Function of the Restrainer: The katechon is a powerful, restraining force that delays the revelation of the Antichrist and prevents total chaos. Carl Schmitt identified the Christian empire as the historical manifestation of the katechon.
Integralists’ Divergence: While integralists operate in the intellectual space influenced by Schmitt, they reject his view of indefinite delay. They believe politics is strictly teleological and seek a revolutionary “end of history” once the Catholic common good regime is established.
Sacralizing Power: The katechon concept allows integralism to sacralize political authority and frame their struggle against perceived threats like secular liberalism as fighting “lawlessness”. This provides theological justification for the exercise of strong state power in service of their goals.

Contemporary Political Influence

Neo-integralist ideas have gained significant traction in contemporary American politics, particularly through influential political figures who bridge religious and secular anti-liberal movements.

J.D. Vance represents a critical bridge figure between Catholic integralism and the Dark Enlightenment movement. While Vance’s political views have been influenced by postliberal Catholic intellectuals, his political career has been financially supported by Peter Thiel, a key figure in the techno-libertarian NRx network. This makes Vance an embodiment of the tactical alliance between these philosophically incompatible movements—both seeking to dismantle liberal democracy but toward mutually exclusive ends: Catholic theocracy versus post-human techno-capitalism.

Cultural Infrastructure: ACTS 17 Collective

The ACTS 17 Collective, founded by Trae and Michelle Stephens, exemplifies the cultural networking infrastructure that connects religious and secular anti-liberal circles. This Christian evangelistic ministry engages Silicon Valley tech elites through events and discussions, with Peter Thiel as a prominent speaker. While ACTS 17 itself is not an integralist political project—it focuses on personal evangelism and “redefining success” through Christian values—it provides a social space where figures like Thiel can discuss topics including integralism, caesaropapism, and critiques of liberalism with both religious conservatives and tech elites. This illustrates how cultural and social networks facilitate exchange between movements that remain philosophically and politically distinct.

This convergence is also visible in initiatives like Project 2025, which incorporates both integralist and Dark Enlightenment objectives, particularly institutional purge strategies aimed at capturing government from within.

The Paradoxical Alliance: Integralism and the Dark Enlightenment

Neo-Integralism shares a tactical alliance with the Dark Enlightenment (Neoreactionary) movement, despite fundamentally incompatible ultimate visions. Both movements:

Reject liberal democracy, egalitarianism, and individual autonomy as organizing principles
Draw on Carl Schmitt’s anti-democratic authoritarianism
Advocate institutional capture strategies (Common Good Constitutionalism vs. RAGE/DOGE)
Feed into the National Conservative movement
Support illiberal models and authoritarian governance
Unite through figures like J.D. Vance who bridge both worlds

However, their end goals are mutually exclusive:

Neo-Integralism: Static Catholic theocratic order where temporal power is subordinated to the Church’s spiritual authority, oriented toward eternal salvation and the supernatural common good
Dark Enlightenment: Post-human techno-capitalist acceleration toward singularity, where states operate as competing gov-corps accountable to shareholders and “nothing human makes it out of the near-future”

This represents an alliance of convenience against liberal democracy—united in their critique and demolition strategy, but inevitably conflicting over what replaces it. The integralist vision of Church supremacy over temporal authority is incompatible with NRx’s vision of autonomous techno-capital and post-human transformation. Like ideological bedfellows in revolutionary movements throughout history, they collaborate to overthrow the existing order while harboring irreconcilable visions of the future.

Sources

Notes mentioning this note

Dark Enlightenment and Neoreactionary Movement

This is a [[Primer primer]] on the Dark Enlightenment (DE) and Neoreactionary Movement (NRx).

Here are all the notes in this garden, along with their links, visualized as a graph.