- George Herbert, ' Providence '. What is Integralism Today? ' - by Edmund Waldstein, O.Cist, in the- is required reading for those seeking to understand how political theology should respond to the context analysed in both The Politics of Virtue (John Milbank and Adrian Pabst, 2016) and Why Liberalism Failed (Patrick Deneen, 2018). In particular, we should note his statement:This is not to say that an Anglican can heartily endorse Waldstein's account of integralism. For example, consider this statement from the article:This seems to suggest an understanding which John Milbank has described as "Baroque neo-scholastic decadence":Milbank has also outlined the origins of this:Much depends on the meaning of Waldstein's rejection of "neutral". Does it mean, on the one hand, "something more like the paleo-Durkheimian arrangement of the baroque confessional state"? Or, on the other, is it an acceptance of a different constitutional arrangement which yet also expresses "an ordered relation of temporal and spiritual power in the deliberate pursuit of the good for human beings"?At this point, we might consider an important post on The Hipster Conservative , ' The Idea of An Anglican Society '. The post notes:This absence - which is not least due to a lack of Anglican confidence in our own tradition - means that the discourse is not enriched by the Anglican experience, an experience which, asstates, has much to offer contemporary political reflection:So how might a classical Anglican perspective respond to Waldstein's summary of contemporary Roman Catholic integralism? A good starting point is C.S. Lewis' description of Hooker's vision:In this vision, political institutions are not condemned as 'secular' apart from a recognition of the Church. The commonwealth, as well as the Church, is "of God": duties, obligations, and responsibilities within the commonwealth are from God and are called towards God. Thus, according to Hooker, those who administer the commonwealth "are themselves agents in [God's] busines, the sentence of right Godes own verdict, and them selves his preistes to deliver it" (V.1.2).Thus, when Hooker declares that "True Religion is the "roote ... and staye of all well ordered common-wealthes" it is because "religion ... perfecteth mens habilities unto all kinds of vertuous services in the common wealth" (V.1.5). It is for the flourishing and good ordering of the commonwealth, not in service of the ecclesial triumphalism and militancy of the Baroque confessional state. John Hughes described this classical Anglican vision as "integral humanism". It has a quite different genealogy to the traditionalist Roman Catholic integralism described by Waldstein, leading to a 'higher' understanding of 'secular' authority:Tomorrow's post will reflect on the significance of this for the contemporary political and cultural context. For now, however, it is appropriate to end with the closing words from Hughes' essay 'Anglicanism as Integral Humanism'. Rather than handing over significant aspects of the created order to a fallen angel who claims to be "Prince of this world", Anglican integral humanism joyfully, robustly confesses all things - including the commonwealth - "as flowing from him and to him, who is the Alpha and Omega of all things".