Mere Reaction

A barnstormer article from Kristor over at The Orthosphere discussing the essential nature of anti-secularism to the greater Reactionary project. It has provoked quite the conversation in the comment section. I have long held that Reaction is necessarily anti-secular in its outlook on how society should be governed and structured. This is the vital Theonomic requirement.

Nick B. Steves helpfully refines the point in his own comments, to say that the Reactionary is, rather than being dogmatically focused on Theonomy at every turn and relying solely on Theonomy-focused sources, is instead steadfast in his position that the Reactionary State is not to be secular. It is the ‘mere Reactionary’ position that a state religion is essential for stable, functioning societies in the World of Tradition. Not in the sense of state-run religion (which is essentially what you can call Liberalism itself), but in the delegation of appropriate power to the priestly caste.

As I said in my previous article on a similar topic, the Christian who supports the secular state is a traitor to his religion.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s