Dear Julie and all, > As Artur has so beautifully explained, a Manicheist is a dualist, one > who sees the world in terms of "good guys" and "bad guys". This goes > much farther back in history than the 1950s Hollywood westerns where the > good guys wore white hats. It goes back to Persia a couple thousand > years ago. The good and the bad/evil in Manichaeism often have equal, or > nearly equal power. Before he was a Christian, Augustine of Hippo was a > Manicheist. > Today, there is this odd combination of convictions (odd from an > historical viewpoint) that Artur describes as a manicheist Christian. > Pres. George Bush, for example, is a manicheist Christian. He easily > talks of an axis of evil, "and it ain't us". A non-Manicheist > Christian takes a more complex view of good and evil. We recognize > that there is moral evil in the hearts of all, or nearly all. (I > suppose it would have taken a heart like that of the Dalai Lama's to > have not felt fear and revenge at noon, September 11.) A > non-Manicheist Christian realizes that there is room for moral good in
> the hearts of all, or nearly all. I, e.g., believe that a war on terror > must begin in my own heart, by my heart, on my heart, for my heart holds > both a desire for peace and a desire for revenge. Furthermore, a > non-manicheist Christian realizes that s/he frequently is, but ought not > be, the one who decides what is good and what is evil, even in a moral > sense. This is, I think, a more complex view of good and evil than > President Bush sets forth in his public pronouncements. There is much > more to a non-manicheist Christianity than this, (the whole faith > relationship to the love of God business, for one) but I think that > this answers your question. If I've not been sufficiently detailed, > I'll be happy to write more. > > Joy in the Journey of Life,, Jim
