A Christian case for anarchism

Discussion Theology
1

Here’s something I’ve been wondering for a while now, considering the situation in the last year or so: Should we obey the Caesar is he is the antichrist.
Or a more refined way of putting it, is there a case for Christian anarchism and accelerationism.

If we truly believe that the moral fabric of our societies will rejuvenate once this decaying civilization has fallen apart and the grip of the beast over our lives is weakened, and thus more souls will escape eternal damnation, is it not our moral duty to help the process along?

The accelerationism I talk about is not eschatological accelerationism, mind you. We’re not Zionists, and Christ will come whenever He chooses to do so.

4 Likes
2

It’s an interesting question I also have happend to look into lately. Mind you I have been looking at the Catholic perspective, so I don’t know if you will agree or not.

Basically the Catholic Church teaches all power and authority come from God, so rebellion or sedition against the state is rebellion against God, regardless of how terrible a ruler or government may be. So in a sense we are barred from breaking the laws of legitimate state authority, however we are duty bound to disobey illegitimate laws.

However St Thomas Aquinas explores sedition in the summa theologica and other writings.

He thinks there can be justification for it under certain circumstances.

Namely that you appeal to a higher authority and seek permission to overthrow a tyrant, if there is a reasonable chance of success, and overthrowing a tyrant will not lead to more trouble and hardship than what was being endured under the tyrant.

Here is a snippet from the Summa:

“Obj. 3. Further, It is praiseworthy to deliver a multitude from a tyrannical rule. Yet this cannot easily be done without some dissension in the multitude, if one part of the multitude seeks to retain the tyrant, while the rest strive to dethrone him. Therefore there can be sedition without mortal sin.”

“Reply Obj. 3. A tyrannical government is not just, because it is directed, not to the common good, but to the private good of the ruler, as the Philosopher states (Polit. iii. Ethic. viii.). Consequently there is no sedition in disturbing a government of this kind, unless indeed the tyrant’s rule be disturbed so inordinately, that his subjects suffer greater harm from the consequent disturbance than from the tyrant’s government. Indeed it is the tyrant rather that is guilty of sedition, since he encourages discord and sedition among his subjects, that he may lord over them more securely; for this is tyranny, being conducive to the private good of the ruler, and to the injury of the multitude.”

2 Likes
3

This is the thing, it is a gamble. Historically speaking, after a period of civil war and/or revolution (what practically amounts to anarchism), the potential for the new government is up in the air. Encouraging total collapse of the current liberal jewish-bourgeois system will mean that the power vacuum from it will be filled by some group eventually, which could ultimately be worse for one’s soul. To me, anarchy is the period between a secure government where smaller independent groups vy for control - the anarchist nightmare of “warlordism”. The truth of the matter is if you want to encourage collapse, there must be a viable alternative to the current system in place before the accelerationist efforts occur in order to guide people toward your chosen system.

If the chosen system is Christian communities divorced from one another akin to the ‘Trumpton theory’ https://youtu.be/PJvIFOGhba8 then it becomes simple and easy to be overran by a bureaucratised and professional state. Anarchy is not the answer, but taking legitimacy away from the modern state and toward your organisation, followed by a period of violent social upheaval is the trend.

5 Likes
4

St. Thomas More provides us with an option regarding “Render unto Caesar…”. The wording of a law is very important, so make sure you read the document yourself since the current situation in Australia is that they cannot mandate the vaccine firstly because of the law (they are trying to change it) and secondly because of the constitution (they will need a referendum to change it). The result is that I can legally refuse the vaccine and might have a case for contesting any fines surrounding the matter (since the mandate isn’t backed up by any laws).
Further, St. Thomas More, when he was sentenced to death, proclaimed that he would die “the king’s faithful servant, but God’s first.” As Christians, we know that any civil law and any government only has authority when it is obedient to God, from Whom all authority comes and to Whom all authority belongs. In removing the freedom from people on such grounds as these, the governments of the world are in breach of what they may justly do, so any rules that they have created around this supposed pandemic are made without the authority with which they made, for example, the road rules, and so, whilst it may be better to obey some of the rules in the interests of staying alive, we are not, to my mind, truly obliged to obey them since their creation was not justified.


I do not know about moral duty here, but I would suggest that we would be better focusing on what is happening each day rather than what might or might not happen in a few weeks (take “today” here to mean “at this time”). Our focus and our goals shouldn’t change simply because the situation is a little different. Here in Australia, they’ve started up “Quarantine/Isolation Hotels”. What they are doing is pretty much what the Nazis and Communists were doing in the lead-up to the Second World War. They’re carting off to these places anyone who disagrees with them and saying that they will be “re-educated”. Strangely, and as it was with Nazi Germany, there is full support from the media for this. We will have our own Auschwitz soon, and, please, don’t give me that shit about how there were no executions happening.
Our goal, as we have stated it, is to try to save what we can, with the priority being our own souls and then the souls of our neighbours.


I don’t know a huge amount about accelerationism, but, as you have noted, Christ will come when He is ready, which kind of makes any accelerationism redundant. Bear in mind that the Jews in the Old Testament frequently sought to hurry along God’s Plan and were punished as a result. In seeking to rush God, whether you recognise it or not, you are demonstrating a lack of trust in Him. The Lord told us that only the Father knows when the world is to end, so we should pray always that we are ready and trust that God has everything well in hand.

2 Likes
5

Also wanted to add a thought to this point you made.

A part of the process of rejuvenation invovles suffering and chastisement for our sins. It’s why we generally are not supposed to take action against a tyrannical ruler and instead we should endure it as God will appoint new leadership when he is ready.

So when you speak about accelerating the collapse, my instinct would be not to. Because it will cause pain and suffering to many people, we shouldn’t seek it out because, as St Paul teaches, we are not to do evil for some good to come about later. Let the tyrants be responsible for their actions.

As an example I live in Melbourne, Australia. I can sympathise with the protesters who want their freedom back, however fundamentally I don’t agree with them and I won’t join them.

This is because I know what they truly want is to go back to the way life was before so they can continue in their degeneracy unabated. The tyrant premier here will be responsible for his actions and I won’t attempt to provoke him to further tyranny so I don’t also bear responsibillty for his actions.

This country for the most part is a Godless nation that revels in sin and those sins will be what will accelerate the collapse.

2 Likes
6

I’m torn on it. On the one hand, it would feel really good to see the current systems collapse, on the other hand, can we properly discern what God is using this for?

The Israelites languished in exile, yet there was no physical rebellion, only spiritual.

Then when the Jews were oppressed by the Greeks (and others), there was armed rebellion.

My point being we have to be careful. Is God using the current governments and circumstances to purify his Church? Is God using the slow decay to prepare us for further persecution?

We also have to talk about reasonable chances of success.

I live in Canada, if I knew I had 1 million people who were willing to fight and another 2 million who would support us. Then yes, I’d take that chance and join in.

But that’s not realistic. It’s not realistic in any western country.

The majority of people are generally happy with the current regimes in most countries. No matter what far right or even conservative groups say about decay and that there’s ‘resistance’ forming, it’s not. People are happy in their hedonism, politicians are happy in their control, and church leaders are happy with their lined pockets.

What is our best option at the moment government wise then?

I’d say work together with them for a common good. When Daniel was with King Nebuchadnezzar, his resistance was spiritual. He advised the king well when needed and served him, but served God first of all, even in defiance of the king and others.

4 Likes
7

All early christians noted how obviously the obedience to state rule only applies to what doesn’t go against God. I see a rather clear case for the state being so absolutely disgusting that it needs to be rooted out. The replacement is another matter, but it is clear what we have just has to go.

1 Like
8

In 1 Samuel 8, the people of Israel wanted a king to be like the other nations on Earth which displeased Samuel. Samuel prayed to the Lord who answered him:

“Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king. 8 As they have done from the day I brought them up out of Egypt until this day, forsaking me and serving other gods, so they are doing to you. 9 Now listen to them; but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will claim as his rights.”

When Samuel told them that a human king would lead to militarism, conscription, taxation and corruption and how a human king wouldn’t answer their demands, the Israelite’s still demanded a king which lead to Saul becoming the ruler of Israel.

9

Acts 5:12-6:7 also states “We must obey God as ruler rather than men”

We also can’t ignore the fact that early Christians were persecuted not for being Christian perse, but because they refused to worship human idols in the form of the Roman Emperor, thus they by extension refused to sear allegiance to Rome.

When Speratus was requested to swear by the Roman Emperor, he stated the following:

I recognize not the empire of this world, because I know my Lord, the King of kings and Emperor of all nations the King of kings and Emperor of all nations.