Anarchy and Christianity

Jacques Ellul's book is unfocused and frequently contradictory - I guess "paradoxical" is the polite term - occasionally verging on incoherence. Still, he provides an ultimately enjoyable, if often confusing, account of the relationship between Christianity and "anarchy," as Ellul understands the two movements. If the book is a relatively aimless ramble, still it is a thoroughly harmless and occasionally enlightening one.A Protestant theologian of some renown, Ellul's personal intellectual odyssey was deeply influenced by major events of anarchist history that are utterly forgotten by my most Christians. Alluding to the Kronstadt rebellion of 1921, Ellul writes that "the Cronstadt sailors and the Makhno government seemed to me to have been truly revolutionary and I could not pardon their suppression." (p. 2). Referring to the Stalinist treachery in May of 1937, Ellul adds that "what led me to detest the communists was their conduct during the Spanish Civil War and their horrible assassination of the Barcelona anarchists." (p. 2). That's enough to establish Ellul's credibility as a political (or anti-political) radical.But what of Anarchy and Christianity? "There has always been a Christian anarchism," writes Ellul. (p.7) "In every century there have been Christians who have discovered the simple biblical truth, whether intellectually, mystically, or socially." (p. 7). And yet, Ellul insists, "I am not in any way trying to tell Christians that they ought to be anarchists." (p. 4).What exactly is this "simple biblical truth" that Ellul insists he is not telling Christians to follow? What do "anarchism" and "anarchy" mean?"By anarchy," Ellul writes, "I mean first an absolute rejection of violence." (p. 11). As government, by definition seeks a monopoly on the means of organized violence (see Woodrow Wilson's  The State: Elements Of Historical And Practical Politics ), strict pacifists naturally tend toward anarchistic philosophies - witness, for example, Leo Tolstoy and Ammon Hennacy. Taking Jesus' nonviolent teaching seriously, says Ellul, "Christianity means a rejection of power and a fight against it." (p. 13).Yet if Ellul finds himself "thus very close to one of the forms of anarchism," still he insists that he is not truly an anarchist at all: "The true anarchist thinks that an anarchist society - with no state, no organization, no hierarchy, and no authorities - is possible. But I do not. . . . I believe that the anarchist fight, the struggle for an anarchist society is essential, but I also think that the realizing of such a society is impossible." (pp. 18-19).Just four pages later, though, Ellul insists "it is more necessary than ever to promote and extend the anarchist movement," for he says that "Anarchy . . . has a bright future before it. This is why I adopt it." (p. 23).So, is Ellul an anarchist, or isn't he? It really is hard to tell from this book. Perhaps he means to say that it's necessary to strive for the impossible, and that this is what Jesus directed Christians to do. Recall Jesus' charge to his followers "Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect." Matthew 5:48 (NRSV). One need not believe that moral perfection is possible, in order to strive for it.In truth, though, it is rather difficult to understand precisely what Ellul really means to say. I suspect he means to be difficult. Yet his book is studded with random jewels - insights or observations that demand further thought.Of Romans 13:1-7 and Titus 3:1, so often cited as mandating submission to human governments, Ellul writes: "These are the only texts in the whole Bible which stress obedience and the duty of obeying authorities." (p. 50). He insists that they run counter to overwhelming antiauthoritarian currents in the scriptures - currents that he documents with scriptural citations.Considering the temptation of Christ, when Satan offers Jesus the power of all the world's kingdoms (Matthew 4:8-11; Luke 4:5-7), Ellul writes that according to the biblical texts "all the power and glory of the kingdoms, all that has to do with politics and political authority, belongs to the devil. It has all been given to him and he gives it to whom he wills." (p. 48).And of Jesus Christ himself: "For those who are not very familiar with the Bible it must be pointed out that Jesus never said himself that he was the Christ (Messiah) or the Son of God. He always called himself the Son of man (i.e., true man)." (p. 70).There is much in the book to ponder, then, even if Ellul never manages to weave his rambling thoughts into a coherent statement on much of anything in particular.Eric Alan Isaacson

As I said, we need more believers like Mr. Ellul. Although, I don't agree with everything Ellul says what is more important is that he is an original thinker, even though he does often follow the "party line". That may seem paradoxical but I think he comes up with his conclusions by reasoning and not just accepting what he is told. I think he may be afraid of disagreeing with the Bible and Protestant dogma, though; perhaps fearing he can't serve Christ and disagree with some of the typical interpretations. Because of this, I notice a lot of round-about reasoning and possible contradictions. I don't remember individual contradictions but I remember thinking there were some. And I believe that's common with evangelical dogma. I, personally, share more of a gnostic interpretation. Not a DaVinci code, new-agey gnostic interpretation, and not a mythicist or liberal interpretation, either. I accept Jesus's blood atonement, believe in Him in history as fully God and fully man. But,I think He may not be the Jewish OT God, who I think is probably the demiurge, but, instead, I believe Jesus is the manifestation of the Perfect God.Anyway, Mr. Ellul understood that followers of the Way are the salt of the Earth and it shouldn't be expected for the church to be large. He understood we need to live in small communities, like Acts, and, yes, even in our modern age. He also understood that secular anarchists are largely deceived and prejudiced like so many others, although they are perceptive of much of reality. It is interesting how ahead of his times he was, even though he advocated a primitive simple lifestyle, like in the past. For, recently, many modern secular and anarchistic activists are recognizing the value of Jesus's teachings, and how much of an anarchist He really was. Also, many Christians are realizing how important justice is and how Jesus and the early church was apolitical.Christian community may be entering a revival. For anyone interested, look up New Monasticism and communities like Koinonia Farm, the 12 tribes of Israel, and Rutba House. If more Christians lived as Jesus and the early church did, freely and compassionately and if more activists types realized the reality of soul and Spirit and lived as Jesus did real positive change could happen and the world would be a better place. I don't expect it to be perfect, though, and understand this world is not my home.That said, it's probably true that more anarchists live true to Jesus's teaching than those who profess being Christian. To paraphrase a chapter of Romans(??3:12??) The gentiles who don't know God but follow their conscience will not be condemned.

The book is an interesting, enthralling and thought provoking read. I would recommend Anarchy and Christianity to anyone interested in either topic.