His Reign Shall Have No End, by Peter Kwasniewski: A Review

Given the charism of the CCR and the clear superiority of the Traditional Rite for promoting and instantiating the doctrine of Christ the King, we were beyond excited to hear of the publication of Dr. Peter Kwasniewski's new book His Reign Shall Have No End: Catholic Social Teaching for the Lionhearted. And the volume does not disappoint.

“I am interested in presenting a coherent doctrine, not a lightweight mishmash leavened by modern Western liberalism.” —Dr. Peter Kwasniewski

For anyone on the fence about purchasing it, where The Catechism of Christ the King is the Baltimore Catechism, His Reign Shall Have No End is Ludwig Ott's Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma. It takes most of the basic concepts in the former and fleshes them out into a fully-fledged, glorious body of Catholic social teaching, well worth its price for either casual reading or deep study.

The book is enjoyable, first and foremost. Indeed, the biggest problem we had with writing this review was limiting the selection of clever quotations; we could easily have produced a review nearly as long as the book itself, filled with the wise-cracking wisdom that Kwasniewski is known for. The reader will judge whether we've succeeded in whittling down the tree to sufficiently portable staffs; for now, we'll just note that, whatever one may feel while reading the book, one will surely not feel boredom.

Kwasniewski approaches the topic of the Kingship of Christ—and, with it, the entirety of Catholic Social Teaching (CST), which is merely the concrete instantiation of that Kingship—in five parts, and we could think of no better method for this review to take than to approach the work in five parts, as well. And so, let us proceed in parts, and follow Kwasniewski where he leads. It is a delightful road, and long.

Part I: On the Authority of the Church

Why should we listen to the Church about social matters at all? Isn't she a religious body? What business does she have butting her nose into social, political, and economic matters?

A traditional Catholic won't give any credence to such nonsensical objections, but Kwasniewski still sees the need to refute them, and does so with his customary alacrity. As he notes, “I am interested in presenting a coherent doctrine, not a lightweight mishmash leavened by modern Western liberalism.” So the modern, Western, liberal notion that the Church needs to stay in one corner of human endeavor, while the rest is handled by secular, man-centered (“anthropocentric”) institutions, is quickly dismissed. The Church proposes the Faith, and the Faith governs how we live, not merely how we believe; and how we live extends outside the walls of the church and throughout our lives, including our political, our economic, and our social lives. CST cannot possibly be limited to praying in a particular building; it should, and indeed must, govern everything in our lives.

And of his kingdom there shall be no end. —Lk 1:33

Kwasniewski leads, as any Christian should, with the Gospel: “Et regni ejus non erit finis”, “And of his kingdom there shall be no end” Lk 1:33. But he notes, with some interpretative perspicacity, that “no end” is not merely a temporal statement, that His kingdom will not end forever. No; it is in fact an expansive, universal statement, that His kingdom has no end in time, in place, in topic; that it expands over all that ever was, all that is, and all that ever shall be. CST, and the Church's authority to teach on it, is universal; there is no boxing it up and setting it aside. No matter how embarassing it might be “to a modern secular democratic and pluralistic outlook”, the Church's teaching must extend to all these matters—and the Church must preach it to those with authority over them. If only our churchmen weren't so embarassed by their own calling!

Of course, the revolution in the Church has caused a revolution in CST, as well, and Kwasniewski has to spend some time refuting these errors, too. Most especially, though, is the new insistance on the primacy of man; indeed, Kwasniewski notes that Vatican II itself, in Gaudium et Spes, held that “man is the source, the center, and the purpose of all economic and social life,” and this anthropocentricity, this man-centeredness is a problem. Where Pius XI had called for “the peace of Christ in the kingdom of Christ,” the world, and now even (it seems) the Church, are calling for a peace of man in the kingdom of man!

This fundamental disorientation is no nevermind to Kwasniewski, however, nor to CST. The latter is what it ever has been, and what it ever shall be; and Kwasniewski remains as faithful to it as he has proven to be to the traditional Mass and to the entire Catholic Faith. The errors of what he delightfully calls the “ineptly-named Enlightenment” concern us only in the need to refute them. So let us proceed to read of the truth!

The book is brilliantly subtitled “for the Lionhearted” in honor of Leo XIII, whose name means “lion” in Latin. Leo XIII is unquestionably the great expositor of CST, and this book correctly relies heavily on his teaching. Immortale Dei, Rerum Novarum, and so forth are formative documents; they form CST, and they form this book. To his credit, Kwasniewski fully acknowledges, and indeed, celebrates this reliance, in his subtitle as well as elsewhere. He even pitches a volume that he himself has prepared, A Reader in Catholic Social Teaching, consisting of the most prominent Church documents in Catholic social teaching. In short, if what you're looking for is modern political pontification, you've come to the wrong place; but if you want CST in its pure form, reliant on its source documents, then Kwasniewski is your man.

Part II: Hierarchy, Equality, and Freedom

Two of the great obsessions of modernity are freedom and equality, and the interactions between the two. Part II lays out exactly how society should work in regards these things, and particularly takes time to defend the natural state of hierarchy in society. The defense of hierarchy as natural and good is refreshing, honest, and above all Catholic.

Americans seldom see how deeply oligarchic their own society has always been—and is likely ever to remain. —Dr. Peter Kwasniewski

Kwasniewski notes that “equality” does exist, in a sense; but it is an equality of destination, in that God wishes us all to join Him in heaven. It is not equal rights, equal abilities, equal privileges; in fact, our inequality in all these things is as much due to God as our equality in destination. We should all be unequal; because we all play different roles in the body politic, our equality to one another would be as absurd as equality of hand and head.

As an aside, Kwasniewski recognizes that even supposedly egalitarian societies are deeply hierarchical; it's just that they tend to be oligarchial—ruled by the rich—rather than aristocratic—ruled by “the best.” Rank in society is inevitable in reality, even if it is not in name. As he notes, “Americans seldom see how deeply oligarchic their own society has always been—and is likely ever to remain.”

Rather than equality, CST supports solidarity, a true human fraternity rooted in the nature of human society as created by God. “No man is an island, but all men are, in varying ways, responsible for and accountable to others, in the service of that genuine common good that is more truly mine and yours than any purely private good.” This is what unites society, not some communist or liberal notion of human equality.

He also reviews the true nature of freedom, which is a great refresher for anyone living in a society as obsessed with so-called “freedom” as the modern West. Kwasniewski pointing out St. Francis of Assisi as an example of authentic freedom is particularly moving, and a welcome correction to much of the nonsensical fluff we have been hearing about St. Francis since a pontiff took his name. Further expositions of true liberty and the limits on it, following Libertas Præstantissima, the Syllabus of Errors, and Mirari Vos, round off a chapter that will be quite shocking to modern readers, but very true to the Catholic tradition and to CST.

The central, guiding principle for CST is that every society should pursue the common good. Read the footnotes! The only real definition of the common good given in the text is in footnote 14 in Chapter 3; it's a pretty good attempt at explaining what it is, and that's important, given how thoroughly neglected the common good is even in discussions of CST. It's a shame that it's in a footnote, though; it really deserves its own chapter.

Still, Kwasniewski isn't done with equality and hierarchy. He gives us a lovely, rollicking chapter on the heinous attempt to “reverse” the clearly infallible teaching on the permissibility of the death penalty, and an even more strident chapter on the absurd notion of “infinite” dignity for man. Read these; they're great, splendid summaries of two of the most damaging errors of the long list of Pope Francis's foibles. Some of the most powerful turns of phrase in the book are found here. Having ended these errors, though, we're ready to move on to property.

Part III: Material Goods and the Kingdom of Heaven

Kwasniewski, of course, correctly identifies that there's nothing by nature wrong with riches and material goods; but it's also important to note that, while they are not innately bad, they are also dangerous, and they impute on their possessors real responsibilites toward others. He also acknowledges that, despite riches not being inherently evil, historically the rich have, undeniably, very frequently used those possessions to abuse and exploit the poor. One prominent strand of CST is to address this common problem.

We have an excellent chapter on property rights, including that they are not absolute. On the other hand, they do exist, and refusing to permit private property is the primary error of socialism. The universal destination of goods is reviewed, and the notion that it's a socialistic principle is refuted.

And then we get an entire chapter on distributism! As a long-time veteran of the many polemical wars distributists have had with capitalists, this chapter truly delighted me. The strident defense that the law should favor ownership for all, or at least for the great mass of the citizens; that widespread ownership is an unquestionable good, and has been considered such since Aristotle; that this widespread ownership of property is actually conducive to the common good in a way that narrow or social ownership is not; this was all deeply comforting to a distributist soul.

Catholics should be told more often that capitalism is not a Catholic position; it's splendid that Kwasniewski has done so, without apology. He will undoubtedly get a fair quantity of hate-mail about this; as he points out, he can critique many things without any objection, but “if I say so much as one negative word about American-style capitalism, or the Austrian fantasy of a self-regulating free market that maximizes goods and services while minimizing vice and exploitation, I can expect lightning and thunder to fall on my head.”

The coverage of distributism is a bit lacking, even when it's limited to a single chapter in a much wider-ranging book. Most especially, while Kwasniewski correctly identifies distributism as seeking the wider distribution of property, he neglects the critical factor that this should be productive property; that is, fields, forests, factories, mines. Merely owning property simply does not provide the economic security that Rerum Novarum identified as so crucial to the well-being of the working man; owning productive property does. It is the widespread distribution of productive property that makes the distributive state; widespread home ownership is all well and good, but home ownership by those who remain laborers on other men's property are still effectively non-owning workers.

On the other hand, he gets a great deal about distributism right. He praises widespread distribution of property, even if he's inexact about what type of property should be widespread; he acknowledges the power of trade guilds; he disputes the scientific status of economics; he praises subsidiarity; he properly distinguishes distributism from the so-called “democratic socialist” or welfare state. He praises the work of Thomas Storck and of John Médaille, which is indeed excellent, at least on economic matters.

His comparison of capitalist critiques of distributism to modern critiques of chastity education is brilliant, in addition to being entirely new to me.

And, of course, he condemns communism. This is important, particularly given that the council that was supposed to condemn communism for us deliberately chose not to do so, so we still periodically have so-called Catholics telling us that there really isn't anything wrong with it. Kwasniewski leaves no doubt here: communism, even more than socialism and capitalism, is absolutely incompatible with the Catholic faith. And so we can move on to culture.

Part IV: Conversion of Culture

This is where the book stops being good information and starts being a call to action. We, as Catholics, need to work to instantiate the reign of Christ the King in our world, here and now. Traditionalists especially have a tendency to look back at the Middle Ages as a golden age, and in many ways they were; but they didn't become that way all by themselves.

The Middle Ages were not a “Five-Century Plan” that someone implemented; it was the organic result of many generations of clergy, religious, and laity who lived their faith with gusto.

We need to be those generations. We need to live our faith with gusto, and create a golden age of our own. In the motto of the great Pope St. Pius X (and, incidentally, of my alma mater): Instaurare omnia in Christo—restore all things in Christ!

“True progress, for Catholics, occurs when the laity infuse the spirit of the gospel into temporal realities.” Truer words could hardly be spoken, though Kwasniewski proceeds to try:

Fascist Germany, Soviet Russia, contemporary France, Communist China, Canada and the United States in their liberal drift, are no different from each other in one fundamental way: each has pretended that what is right and wrong can be determined by the autonomous will of man, whether by electorates or by politicians acting (truly or supposedly) in their name. We have seen where this ends up: the Gulag, the concentration camp, the abortion mill, the anti-culture of “whatever.” If we want to end up in a better place, and ultimately in heaven, we need to rethink, from the ground up, what government is for, what transcendent norms it ought to follow, and how it must justify itself before the eyes of God and men.

The problem with our societies is that they do not acknowledge Christ the King. But we do. Let us live in our societies, but let us live in them as though we truly believe that Christ is King; that way we can restore all things in Him. “If we truly love Christ, then we will love and long for Christendom, which is the flowering of His grace in this vale of tears.”

The Middle Ages were not a “Five-Century Plan” that someone implemented; it was the organic result of many generations of clergy, religious, and laity who lived their faith with gusto. —Dr. Peter Kwasniewski

Kwasniewski justifies the confessional state, as any Catholic must do, and this is well worth the time. However, he also spends some time trying to reconcile Dignitatis humanæ with traditional Catholic teaching, which I think is likely a waste of his considerable talents. While he fully acknowledges the difficulty of this reconciliation, and that the document is clearly *intended* to endorse the secular state, he does make the effort. Whether he's successful or not, I will withhold judgment, though he seems to do as good a job as anyone can; I just think there's no point in the effort. If Dignitatis humanæ is reconcilable with the traditional teaching, it's so hopelessly ambiguous that it should be consigned to the dustbin of history. If it's not so reconcilable, then it's wrong, and it should be consigned to the dustbin of history. Either way, I don't think we should be twisting ourselves into knots trying to interpret it.

He also spends a chapter on Americanism and patriotism, which is worth the time. His description of the “Mass for the Fourth of July” he once attended is delightful.

Finally, he has a chapter showing that modern conservatism is part of the problem. “The central organizing concept for the conservative is American citizenship. It is around this axis that all other aspects of life and action revolve.” In other words, the conservative doesn't really care about Christ the King; he cares about the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, American institutions. And this is true; I am reminded of an old professor and friend, Christopher Blum, who once told me, “Conservatives are all revolutionaries; they just defend the prior revolution.” This was an almost offhand comment, but in the twenty-odd years since then I've found it to be infallibly true. We don't need conservatives; we need traditionalists.

For traditionalists, “[t]he central organizing concept is our citizenship in heaven.” We don't want to instantiate the last revolution; we want to instantiate the peace of Christ in the kingdom of Christ. We are not the same. We can sometimes make common cause with conservatives, and sometimes we really should; however, “it won’t be easy, because there is a lack of clear agreement about the very nature of the crisis we are facing and, consequently, the response called for.”

Kwasniewski then reminds us of the evils of the Freemasons; condemns the usurpation of the rainbow by the alphabet crew; and finally moves on to the final step.

Part V: The Kingship of Christ

Christ is the font and apex of the social order. As modernity fell increasingly into insanity, Pius XI knew that we needed a stronger, regular reminder of the important truth that Christ is, in fact, the king of all, including our societies, including here and including now. So he established the feast of Christ the King by the encyclical Quas Primas in 1925.

Christ's kingship is earthly as well as spiritual:

One thing we must never forget: God is the King of all creation, whether we want Him to be or not; we do not get to decide by means of a Brexit-type referendum whether or not He will be King, but only whether we will submit humbly to His just and merciful reign, or rebel against it to our own detriment.

Yet, despite promulgating this feast, despite spending centuries establishing a Christian social order and then centuries fighting against those who were tearing it down, “[i]t is not merely the government that doesn’t want Christ as King; it seems to be the postconciliar Church as well.” This is heartbreaking, of course, but sadly true. Even the Vatican doesn't proclaim Christ as King.

The grand spirit of Pope Leo XIII is brought up again, as “the pope who successfully brought the Church into dialogue with modernity—unlike the Second Vatican Council, which placed the Church into dhimmitude.” However, once again St. Francis of Assisi comes into the picture, in a comparison that makes the heart soar even as it sinks:

Leo XIII’s engagement was, however, not in the style of Pope Francis but rather in that of Saint Francis, who marched straight into the enemy (Islamic) camp and began to preach the gospel of conversion for the salvation of souls. And although he did not succeed, he made it clear where he stood, and won grudging respect for his courage. The wordy and worldly encyclical Fratelli Tutti of Francis falls into shadow compared with the pure and luminous doctrine of Leo XIII’s Humanum Genus.

The task ahead of us is not easy; but it is a task that we must undertake. “The conversion, the Christianization, of our societies will not come easily; they have been inoculated, as it were, against Christ.” It will be the work of generations and of centuries; we must start now. Age viriliter! Noli morare! Act manfully! Do not delay!

Conclusion

His Reign Shall Have No End is a deep, wide-ranging, and profoundly inspiring book, that lays the foundations for the doctrine of Christ the King and pushes us on to action on how to establish it in the world around us. This is no utopian fantasy; Kwasniewski gives us no illusions about how difficult the task will be. The book throughout is filled with acknowledgements of the weight of the task ahead, and even of calls to martyrdom—as undoubtedly many of us and our descendents will be called to undergo.

But it is a fight worth fighting; indeed, it is the only fight worth fighting. So let us go! Fight the fight! ¡Viva Cristo Rey!

Christus vincit! Christus regnat! Christus imperat!