Introduction to this Series

Studying the Kingdom of God over the years has led me to conclusions that put me at odds with the mainstream understanding of discipleship. My recent conclusion is that Gospel and Christ-centered discipleship is Anarchism in its purest form. But what’s so alarming about my conclusion? It’s against the grain; it rebukes the mainstream pulpiteer; it unmasks the Vatican influence of our “Protestant, god-fearing” nation. In short, it’s everything Jesus said it would be: “not of this world.”

“Anarchism,” as I’ve come to understand it, can be summarized in two points: 1) All authority is illegitimate unless it can prove itself otherwise, and 2) “Anarchism” is acting as though you’re already free within any given society. The New Oxford American Dictionary defines “Anarchism” as “the abolition of all government and the organization of society on a voluntary, cooperative basis without recourse to force or compulsion.” If these give us a sense of the essence of Anarchism, it’s hard to fathom why Evangelicals bristle at the term because the Gospels and Epistles are littered with examples of voluntary organization of believers (ekklesia) and the hope of the final establishment of God’s Kingdom on earth (requiring an overthrow the present systems). In light of these two basic New Testament facts, every believer is, at the very least, a quasi-Anarchist in their heart of hearts. They’re just taught not to embellish it. 

Therefore, the aim of this series is to demonstrate that, historically, true disciples of Jesus have tended toward “Anarchism” because Jesus’ teachings are categorically “Anarchist.” Principles of the Kingdom of God that help determine this include “The Two Kingdoms,” “Non-Resistance”/ “Conscientious Objection,” “Freedom of Conscience,” and in the most radical groups, “Community of Goods.” Furthermore, we’ll see that these Christ-centered ideals are the bedrock of “Anabaptism” which “sprang up” in the Dark Ages. This evidence is extremely helpful because it helps with the much broader historical context leading up to modern-day expressions of Anarchism. It may not have always been known as “Anarchy,” but the blueprint was drafted long ago.

Alexandre J. M. E. Christoyannopoulos’ essay Christian Anarchism: A Revolutionary Reading of the Bible was a helpful primer for showing me how Anabaptism and Anarchism are two strands of the same thread. I also recommend That Holy Anarchist: Reflections on Christianity & Anarchism by Mark Van Steenwyk.

It should be noted that I found Christoyannopoulos’ examination of Anarchism’s Christian underpinnings incomplete because he neglects to include more details about the Anabaptists’ movement and focuses heavily on one person, Tolstoy (he does admit the essay is a “work in progress”). Van Steenwyk is more generous because he broadens his historical analysis by giving an overview of different Anarchistic groups in different periods and explores the Anabaptist “Two Kingdom” doctrine. However helpful these essays and books on the subject are, I simply wanted to offer another perspective—not because my perspective is the only correct one, but rather because I belong to the Anabaptist tradition and value their legacy too much to exclude, or diminish, their voice as it might relate to this topic. These medieval “radicals,” as they were termed by their persecutors, exemplified an Anarchist spirit. It could be said that, in general, the Anabaptist spirit of volunteerism and brotherly love is a continual legacy still seen in groups like the Hutterites and Bruderhoff today. For these reasons, I will attempt to introduce and focus on the Anabaptist movement in light of Scripture to prove that Primitive Christianity is truly Anarchist.

Part 1 | Legitimacy of the State

Perhaps they’d reluctantly admit that hierarchy is inevitable, but I’ve gathered that this is generally accepted amongst Anarchists. They simply believe authorities must prove they’re legitimate or be dismantled at once. If Anarchists admit that hierarchy is inevitable, the problem amongst them is agreeing what kind, or how much, is necessary, hence all the varied expressions of Anarchism. We’re concerned with “Christian Anarchism,” or what I call “Christo-Anarchism.” The hierarchical structures in this system are fairly obvious although still contested amongst Christo-Anarchists. In general, the hierarchies found in New Testament Christianity are as follows: God is the supreme ruler; men are “heads of the household”; men, women, children, elders/teachers/“pastors”, “servants” and freedmen—everyone—in the ekklesia are equals. 

The presupposition of Christianity in most of its forms is that God’s authority is legitimate because God is the Creator of all things. The question then centers around the State, sometimes referred to as “man-made governments” in the  religious world. It just so happens that out of some necessity, God has allowed government amongst men; yet, because men are corrupt by nature, they naturally abuse this power. Therefore, when a human-made government proves itself “unworthy” and “illegitimate,” it would seem men are free to disobey—especially disciples of Jesus. But this disobedience isn’t a violent one (more on this concept later). For the purpose of engaging this topic as comprehensively, yet succinctly as possible, it's necessary to understand just what “The State” is. The State can be described as 

• a centralized institution of power with a monopoly  on the use of violence

• an administrative body which lays claim to use of this violence (police force/ military)

• a geographical area over which this violence is exercised (established by borders)

When it comes to questioning the “legitimacy of the State,” there’s a deep polarization in “Christendom.” There are supporters of the state, the ambivalent folk who’re as indifferent to politics as they are their own religion, and there are active protestors of the state. Unlike the antichrists who advocate taking-up of arms, joining the military, and killing one’s enemies, true disciples would argue that any disobedience against a government must be non-violent, no matter the cost. Both groups hope to win over the “fence-sitters.”

The “Christo-Anarchist” might suggest that if a man-made ordinance doesn’t violate their conscience or the word of God, they happily obey; if it does, however, violate their religious conscience, they happily disobey, thus serving their much Higher Master. Admittedly, there’s a gray area in this application we must navigate.

While this seems counter-intuitive, it’s important to know that Anarchism isn’t an end-goal itself as much as it is a process toward reaching an ideal. The Christo-Anarchist understands that patience in tribulation and persecution at the hand of an Empire is pure Christ-like civil disobedience, which is categorically Anarchism, and the ideal is only realized in the Second Coming of Jesus. This enshrines “separation of church and state” among other things during our earthly sojourning. In other words, there’s no waiting for a future “Kingdom of God” because many Anabaptists (Anarchists) are interested in living the “Kingdom principles” now. There’s no greater demonstration of this than Jesus’ life and ministry. Here we see one shining example (Jesus’ interrogation):

“And went again into the judgment hall, and saith unto Jesus, ‘Whence art thou?’ But Jesus gave him no answer. Then saith Pilate unto him, ‘Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee?’ Jesus answered, ‘Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin.’”

Rome was the Empire at this time, so it fits our definition of “The State” given above. To this State, Jesus defiantly said, in no uncertain terms, “You couldn’t possibly have power against me unless someone gave you that power.” Though Jesus Christ and other New Testament writers—at least in some way—recognize the “legitimacy of human government” as something having been, at least at one point, ordained by God, the clash between Kingdom principles and human government organizations are frequent throughout the Gospels and are such that, when necessary, the human government needs to be rebuked and disobeyed. There are a number of things we learn from this passage that prove Jesus was an Anarchist: 

1. Jesus recognized that, ultimately, there’s no inherent power in The State

2. Jesus also recognized that Pilate was acting out of political necessity, not according to truth—Pilate was trying to quell social unrest…unrest no doubt attributed to this prophet of God. Pilate’s dilemma underscores the inherent unjustness of The State, contrary to the popular understanding of Romans 13. 

3. Jesus not only implied the Roman state was guilty of wrong judgment and execution, but also the religious Jewish leaders who slandered him and called for his arrest and crucifixion.  This rejection of political and religious norms of his day is another reason to assume Anarchism in the New Testament. These two themes—resistance to secular power and resistance to a false religious system—run parallel in the Gospels.

Ultimately, our assessment here must focus on the facts that because governments on earth are “ordained of God,” they have no legitimate authority in themselves, and that it’s impossible for The State to wield the sword in a just manner.

We have another place in the New Testament where governments of men are seen as “legitimate,” but limits the believer’s place in them. This infamous passage is often misconstrued by the pseudo-pious to suggest there’s nothing wrong with submission to The State. These proponents suggest “Nationalism” and “Patriotism” are godly sentiments, often claiming that if you’re neither a “Patriot” or “Nationalist,” then you’re a “Commie” and not a true American Christian. Brother Paul’s case is quite clear, though, if we understand chapter 12 and chapter 13 of Romans together. 

About the Author

Nathan Moon is a house-painter because he “has a useless English degree”. More importantly, he’s a student of Jesus, which is the theme of his blog.

He hopes to one day have a small photography/movie-production company. He lives in Wisconsin with his wife and four daughters.

You can learn more about him and see his work at his website is www.anabaptistapologist.com.