Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 00:05:30 +0100
From: Erik <anarchie-AT-buelinckx.net>
Subject: Re: christian anarchists


At 14:10 -0400 23-10-1999, Shawn P. Wilbur wrote:
>Erik asks:
>
>> Simple put : why do people need to call themselves xtian anarchist or
>> some other xxx anarchist ?
>
>"Need" is probably the wrong word. For some of us, "christian anarchist"
>just marks the road along which we developed libertarian principles.

Since i have this bad habit of trying to understand the other's out of my
own evolution sometimes i sound like a person i am not. I was raised
catholic, and i followed a probably common  road towards anarchism (through
xtianity as some sort of basic communism and jesus as a common person
misquoted or misused by organised religion, etc...)

On a certain point in my life (16-18 years old i guess) i stopped believing
in god and the likes. Now more than 20 years later i still don't believe in
anything godlike. My way of trying to understand why people believe in
god(s) or higher powers or whatever, is seeing it as a "need". I do
understand that other people could interpret this as if i consider them
either inferior or not having a clue. Well, that's not true. It is part of
every persons' freedom to believe what she wants, as long as this is no
infringement on other people's freedom. I'm not trying to convert anybody
to "atheism" (a label i don't like myself).


> Maybe
>neither label - "christian" or "anarchist" is *necessary.* But they are
>useful for establishing connections to others concerned with what concerns
>us - sometimes oppositional connections, as are many of mine with most
>"christians" (and more than a few "anarchists" ;) - and they also mark
>particular disciplines, particular ways of working through questions about
>how to live, what our relationship to law, responsibility, one another,
>etc might be, or ought to be.

True enough. You certainly know, since individual words tend to split
people over their meaning, concepts are even worse. But as humans we are
stuck with them. Especially on this list where people can't use any other
commuication than the written word.

One of the reasons i raised (again) this question is that when xtian
anarchists stress the importance here of what they belief it's the
anarchist elements of their belief that they put forward. So i am a bit
surprised what the xtian belief has to do with it, since those anarchist
"principles" (too rigid word here) can stand by themselves. I partly
understand your "road along which we developed libertarian principles", but
since i took another path it is not always clear.
...
>These periodic outbreaks of incredulity about "christian anarchists" - and
>we can just about map the seasons by them by now, eh? - seem very similar
>in their dynamics to the periodic social/lifestylist panics.

and abortion, and vegetarianism, and ...

we've been to long on the list

...
>I don't really care if folks mix their anarchism with christianity,
>atheism, zen, veganism, syndicalism, free love, (really) free markets or
>belgian bananas, as long as they're working toward a society based in
>liberty, voluntary association and mutual aid.


Envisioning an anarchist society puts forward a lot of questions.
Especially the ones about where freedom begins or ends. I had no good
experiences with catholicism. So maybe this something to do with it.

As a father i struggle wit these problems all the time. Where does f.i.
fear for your children's health goes over in coercion ? How can we give
enough options to our children so that they can make a good choice ? What
to do when their good choice is not exactly what we think as good choice ?

All these questions about my sons and my own space of freedom reflect for
me also the discussion about religious (or spiritual) beliefs.

Anyway, Shawn, thanks for the reaction.

Erik