For a little over thirteen years I was an Orthodox Christian and I attended the Greek Orthodox Theological School in the Master of Theological Studies. I am not saint and have much better theologians than I do, but I think I can say a few things about being both orthodox Christians and libertarians.
Although I just started describing myself as a libertarian in the last two years, I think I was always cordial. I had previously considered myself conservative and supported the most conservative issues. At the same time I rejected the death penalty and the second amendment was relaxed. I supported freedom of speech, rejected any form of censorship, I have never seen this as a contradiction to my conservative values. Freedom was always the most important political value and probably would have agreed with Lord Acton that "[ibt[l] is not a means of achieving a higher political goal, but the highest political goal" I've heard the quote or Lord Acton.
I was not conscientious, but I was a loyal supporter of the Republican Party and President Bush. PATRIOT ACT disturbs, but entrusted the administration to do the right thing and rejected Bush's attacks on the political shake of the radical left wing. Although the liberals were open-minded and tolerant, they were betrayed by hate and general inability to conduct a rational debate (most, but not all).
During the 2008 election, I was still open to Mind Guiliani and McCain, and Ron Paul's rejection until I looked at what she was saying. This led me to look more closely at the Libertarian and Libertarian parties. The more I studied, the more I like it, and I started thinking about joining the Libertarian Party. There was a problem. I have proved that I support the non-aggressive axiom, that is, "I am opposed to the launch of force to achieve political or social goals."
I find it unbelievable now that it has a problem. In my opinion, it is fully compatible with the Gospel. I can not for my life and I see that Jesus Christ is based on the impulse of political, social, moral or religious purposes. Unlike some Protestant seccts, Orthodoxy claims that people have free will. God himself does not force anyone to believe in him, obey him, or love him. To do this, it would destroy and invalidate the desirable relationships with mankind.
Many orthodox, orthodoxy are regarded as the golden age of the Byzantine empire, but in the history of the Church, all times are defective and unique problems. In St. Michael's Mother, the church was still suppressed and guided by the czars. Nobody thinks she was healthy to have the church in this state. Byzantine emperors often fleeed or expelled monks, theologians, and patriarchs. Political reasons often supported heresy, while the great saints, such as St. Athanasius and St. Chrysostom, were enemies of the state. St Athanasius subtitle Athanasius contra mundum
Christians are highly valued to pray for their rule, but they are not commanded to blindly obey corrupt rulers against their conscience. Nobody did this sacred thing.
Monarchy, like divorce, was a concession to the weaknesses of the people, but not what God wanted. God warned the Israelites of Samuel that they, their sons and daughters, would become a man's slave. The Israelis insisted that they should be like other nations.
The beginning of the force – even if it is a holy, Christian sovereign or Christian majority – is erroneous and incompatible with God's work. The only valid force of the state is to protect the lives, freedoms and property of individual citizens, regardless of whether the source of power comes from humans or from God. If the people do, then the state can do more than what people have the right to give to the government: the right to their lives, their freedom and their property. If from God, the state can do no more than God does and not use mankind's power to inspire faith, obedience, or love. However, people have the right to defend their lives, their liberty and their property, and therefore the legitimate power of the sovereign to protect the people, but the ruler can not go any further.
What many Christians want from the state, idolatrous. They want the state to do what God does not do. They want the state to shape society into their own image because they do not know persuasion and love. He does not trust God, but in the power of the state. This is idolatry and evil.
The Christian Emperors and Kings of Israel were a mixed item, but none of them were flawless or sinless. Their virtue is the result of their obedience, faith, and love of God. Their sins and sins came to choose their own wills against God and the most frequently used forces against those who did not understand them.
In cases such as warfare for free Christians in other lands or in the present To "liberate" or "secure the world for democracy," it is still a criminal to send young men and women against their wills. This is slavery, kidnapping and mass murder. Those who want to volunteer can do it to help protect the innocent, but the ruler has no right to steal others to kill and die for political purposes. This is what God warned by the Prophet of Samuel.
The kingdom of God is not derived from this world and uses it to prove that the state exercises the power of the will of others for political and social purposes, a misunderstanding of the gospel and the nature of God. I realize that others can come to different conclusions, but I can not believe or accept that any other political philosophy is so compatible with orthodoxy as libertarianism. My orthodox faith leads to no other conclusion: orthodoxy is libertarian.
"Prostitution in Byzantium" Glen Clancey
Source by David Singhiser