Faith at the expense of freedom
Catholic integralism is not fascism. But the two have often made common cause.
Century illustration
In Canto 19 of Inferno, Dante depicts the damned souls of the simoniacs—those who enriched themselves by selling sacred things—imprisoned head-down in circular holes in the rock, feet on fire. Dante despised corrupt clergy and was especially severe about sins relating to greed, so it’s no surprise that he consigned quite a few medieval popes to this section of hell.
But for Dante, simony wasn’t just about greed. It was associated with the decadence of a church that had amassed too much temporal power—a theme that runs through the whole Divine Comedy. It’s why the poet inveighs against the emperor Constantine, whose conversion brought the church wealth and imperial jurisdiction. Elsewhere, Dante argues that church and empire should be distinct spheres, neither wielding power over the other, each answering directly to God.
The debate over the relation of church to state has deep roots, and even in the Middle Ages there was no Christian consensus. Today, many progressive Christians take for granted that separation of church and state prevents abuses in both spheres. But as various conservative Christians try to move the dial from democracy and pluralism toward theocracy, some Catholics among them are arguing for the reinstitution of the political order Dante saw as dangerous.
