Ellul’s book on Violence
Mar 9th, 2008 by John
At the National Pastors Convention, N.T. Wright made mention in passing the book Violence: Reflections from a Christian Perspective by Jacques Ellul. I had only read two books by Ellul—The Subversion of Christianity and The Humiliation of the Word. And I benefited from both.
We live in an increasingly violent world and I have been conditioned by a version of Christianity to celebrate at the most and condone at the least national violence (war). Listening to Bishop N.T. Wright and Bishop John Rucyahana of Rawanda speak about violence and genocide, I felt handicapped. I felt like I was never fully and Christianly informed on the topic of (justified?) violence.
Ellul’s book Violence, while dated (1969), helped me play catch up ball. Writing in the turbulent 60s about violence that occurred in France, Guatemala, and the U.S.A. (civil rights violence and the Viet Nam war controversy), Ellul offers a “radically Christian” view. What fascinated me was that the rhetoric of the 60s to justify violence is the same rhetoric used in public discourse today. It is amazing how quickly the teachings of Jesus and Paul are written off as “impractical” (by many Christians) in a violent world when, in fact, these very teachings are the only hope to address violence.
Oh, Ellul’s a pacifist, you think. Ellul is for non-violent resistance, you say. Read and see. He makes the observation that Gandhi would never have survived against Hitler or Stalin. He would have been shot on sight. One of the reasons that Gandhi’s civil disobedience worked in India was that the culture held to a form of spirituality and Gandhi’s tactics touched something of the Christian ethic in the British mind. The same with Martin Luther King, Jr. in the U.S. A. Without the resident Judeo-Christian ethic in the racist South, the civil rights movement would have been a much greater blood bath in our own country.
I was captured by this line: “The Christian’s first act of non-violence is that he refrain from asking others to live as if they were Christians.”
Chew on that. Ellul takes human sin and evil very seriously. Why do Christians (on the Right or the Left) expect non-Christians to live out the Jesus Way of life that we Christians admittedly don’t live up to ourselves? And we never will without the empowering Presence of the Holy Spirit through Jesus Christ.
We need, as many Christian scholars and pastors are calling for, a theology of the common good. A welcoming place to meet with people of other expressions of Christianity, other faiths (including Muslims) or lack of faith, and through respectful dialogue create what a civil society longs for–the good of all.
Pick up and read.
Popularity: 2% [?]
[...] Late Rounds: A Boxing Blog wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptEllul’s book on Violence Mar 9th, 2008 by John At the National Pastors Convention, N.T. Wright made mention in passing the book Violence: Reflections from a Christian Perspective by Jacques Ellul. I had only read two books by Ellul—The Subversion of Christianity and The Humiliation of the Word. And I benefited from both. We live in an increasingly violent world and I have been conditioned by a version of Christianity to celebrate at the most and condone at the least national violence (war) [...]
[...] 10, 2008 · No Comments I was out for the weekend in Mexico, but I was reading Jesus the Radical Pastor tonight and one particular part of John’s blog hit me at the [...]
John–Thanks for the reminder from Ellul’s book re. (justified) violence.
I shall look for the book. I appreciate your willingness to go against the evangelical mainstream on this.
“The Christian’s first act of non-violence is that he refrain from asking others to live as if they were Christians.”
Oh, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.
Yes.
Denny,
It seems that with the allignment of a large segment of the USAmerican evangelical church with the political Right we are fast losing the Christian way in the world. It’s all about POWER in both the church and politics. The very opposite of the Jesus Way.
Thanks for commenting. I believe you’ll like Ellul’s book
John
Sue,
There were many good sentences in Ellul’s book, but this one grabbed me the most. In view of many Christian power blocs who are trying to “take America back for God,” Ellul’s words are a hard slap of reality.
This is a very interesting post with a lot to mull over. What do we make of Nazi Germany? Why did they embrace violence so easily? Why didn’t the a Christian ethic work in the German mind, a nation steeped in Christian culture, who’s national hero was Martin Luther? Was it buried in the aftermath of WWI and the retribution, hatred and chaos that ensued? Or does it go much deeper than that? I mean, just look at all the violence in Christiandom’s European history.
How much of the restraint in the south during the civil rights movement was due to a Christian ethic at work, and how much was due to the fact that the “whole world was watching”, so the Klan, with their burning crosses, couldn’t operate openly? After all, Martin Luther King was shot.
What happened in Rwanda, a country that was 90% Christian before the genocide of ‘94? Why was the Christian ethic abandoned so easily?
Here is another thought. Following Jesus in Matt 5:38-48 works regardless of the worldly outcome. Loving you enemy works even if that enemy still nails you to a cross. Gandhi’s tactics would have still be right, would have still worked, even if the British shot him. This is the “foolishness of the cross”, what the earth doesn’t understand.
I guess I am saying that we have to be careful not to measure what works in earthly ways. Otherwise people can point to instances where non violence doesn’t end in a favorable earthly outcome and then justify violence as a solution that does work. I am afraid many Christians justify violence on just that basis, because it works in earthly ways of thinking.
Think about this. If India was occupied by violent atheists instead of the British, would Gandhi still have used non violence as a tactic? Is there a danger in thinking of the Gospel as a tactic?
Blessings
steve
Steve,
Great questions. I don’t think Ellul was proposing that Gandhi would be wrong with his “tactic” had he faced Hitler or Stalin. I agree that obedience to Jesus and his Way whether it “works” or not is required.
Your opening questions raise what the two Bishops termed
“the irrationality of evil.” Evil is insane. According to Bishop John Rucyahana, it was the good government and social regulations imposed by Belgium that had the seeds of and led to the evil of the genocide in Rawanda, with pastors hacking people up. E-v-i-l.
It sounds like such a wonderful book.
Thank you brother for the review.
I appreciate your opinions and ideas.
Right now I am doing a lot of reading on the emerging church and how to become more missional. Right now I am reading: “Everything Must Change”, by Brian McLaren
I am also reading: “Adventures in Missing The Point” by Brian McLaren and Tony Campolo.
Also Dan Kimballs book “The Emerging Church: Vintage Christianity for New Generations.”
“The Emerging Culture: Five Perspectives” edited by Leonard Sweet.
“Sunday Dinner: The Lord’s Supper and the Christian Life” by William Willimon.
“Releasing the Power of the Smaller Church” by Shaw McMullen.
I want to say that I have been enjoying reading all of these books. Each one is so full of information and great ideas on how to become more like Christ which is my desire more than anything else in life.
I hope you have a blessed week.
In Him,
Kinney Mabry
Thanks for this post. I look forward to exploring all of the books that you mention here. I humbly want to learn more. The quote about not asking non-Christians to live as Christians will take some digesting. Great post.
Preacherman,
Wow, man, it sounds like you’re really cracking the books. I am glad you have a passion to learn. God belss you!
Uto,
While the book is full of stimulating ideas, that one sentence really got me: “The Christian’s first act of non-violence is that he refrain from asking others to live as if they were Christians.” It is truly something to mull over.