Before you formulate a church and state policy make the assumption that you are a small and perhaps unpopular minority. Then make policy that will protect you and all the other minority groups from religiously driven harassment.
Thanks for the high-level view. It's exciting to hear that you are encountering so many young people who are thinking about this. I suspect the number will only grow, as the most ardent defenders of liberalism today are older. The youth are ready for a regime change, for better or worse (as you mention in point 6). The prudent thing to do would be to offer them something that can temper the excesses of liberalism and cut out the ideology's flawed understanding of human nature while retaining what is good from it. If we can't get there, there's a risk that they will look into less desirable alternatives. Maybe your next book will take this on.
I will continue to offer the view that integralism does not mean the pure vision you describe, but simply some interplay between Church and State, however mild or aggressive this may be.
Thanks for commenting! Yes, I expect the numbers to grow, too. And yes, 21st-century liberalism must take on some rich modifications. And yes, I will address that in my next book!
I went to elementary school in Baltimore in the 1950's. The neighborhood was Jewish - primarily holocaust survivors and their children - and it was ~ 95% Orthodox. When the High Holy days were celebrated, we had to put EVERY kid in the elementary school together to fill a single classroom. I have a cousin who grew up in a VERY catholic neighborhood. As Quakers, we were both outsiders. Integralism does not deal with the religious diversity that we had a century ago, let alone now.
Frankly, I want a much harder and more absolute separation fo church and state than we have now.
Before you formulate a church and state policy make the assumption that you are a small and perhaps unpopular minority. Then make policy that will protect you and all the other minority groups from religiously driven harassment.
Thanks for the high-level view. It's exciting to hear that you are encountering so many young people who are thinking about this. I suspect the number will only grow, as the most ardent defenders of liberalism today are older. The youth are ready for a regime change, for better or worse (as you mention in point 6). The prudent thing to do would be to offer them something that can temper the excesses of liberalism and cut out the ideology's flawed understanding of human nature while retaining what is good from it. If we can't get there, there's a risk that they will look into less desirable alternatives. Maybe your next book will take this on.
I will continue to offer the view that integralism does not mean the pure vision you describe, but simply some interplay between Church and State, however mild or aggressive this may be.
Thanks for commenting! Yes, I expect the numbers to grow, too. And yes, 21st-century liberalism must take on some rich modifications. And yes, I will address that in my next book!
Excellent post! I would love to read your next work on positive political theology. I will buy it, hopefully, as soon as it releases.
Thank you!
I went to elementary school in Baltimore in the 1950's. The neighborhood was Jewish - primarily holocaust survivors and their children - and it was ~ 95% Orthodox. When the High Holy days were celebrated, we had to put EVERY kid in the elementary school together to fill a single classroom. I have a cousin who grew up in a VERY catholic neighborhood. As Quakers, we were both outsiders. Integralism does not deal with the religious diversity that we had a century ago, let alone now.
Frankly, I want a much harder and more absolute separation fo church and state than we have now.