Book Review: The Presence of the Kingdom by Jacques Ellul

Ellul’s book seems primarily to be something of a Christian-focused, philosophical answer to our present cultural situation. So, while not attempting to be anything near a systematic theology, it nonetheless takes certain theological presuppositions with which the philosophical system and final “answer” or “solution” is presented (though he never fleshes this answer out in in any detail, perhaps he does so in his other treatises).

The first chapter, “The Christian in the World,” presents the true teaching that, as Christians, we are most certainly in this world. We may, outside of principally having been made holy, be honest in questioning if we have, in any way, become of this world. Ellul says that our only mission is to be a sign (p. 5). He explains that this is obvious since Christians are to be the salt of the earth, the light of the world, and like sheep in the midst of wolves.

Next, he argues that we are not capable of being pure in this present world. He explains that, upon true reflection of our situation in the world in terms of politics and economics, we all partake in a “collective sin” (pp. 6, 9). He sees Christians escaping this problem in two ways: by despising the material world, or by moralizing (Christianizing) the actions of the world.

Here we come to a clear statement of the problem: “We must not weaken the opposition that exists between the Christian faith, the claims of revelation, and life in the world and its demands, its faults, and its compromises.” As made clear in Clendenin’s Introduction to the book, Ellul is fundamentally dialectical. It is both impossible for us to make the world less sinful and impossible for us to accept it as it is (p. 9).

So it is that the solution to the problem is not the simple bridge of ethics and good works – it is not merely doing something, it is being something. The Christian ethic is always an “agony” (this is a state). It is temporary, in that it must always be revised, and apologetic, in that it abounds to God’s glory (p. 13).

What follows next is a chapter, “Revolutionary Christianity,” where Ellul seeks to put his finger on the cultural and philosophical situation. Simply stated, we are not being “revolutionary Christians” and not experiencing any revolutions – contrary to the world’s understanding. Since all parties (Christians included) believe continued technical progress will bring men the greatest possible good, we are continually lead to catastrophes (p. 24).

The so-called revolution of strengthening our present framework is useless (he believes this includes all seemingly opposed parties in society). Another problem he presents is this: is the only possible means of achieving a real revolution found in the present framework (e.g., propaganda)? Thus we are, in a sense, blind – present means, it seems, must be accepted (p. 27). When the atomic bomb became a fact, it was thrust upon us and simply used. Nothing was asked about it. We have submitted to the dictatorship, dominion, or divinity (i.e., idolatry) of facts raised by the material world (p. 29).

So a true revolution, for Ellul, is man living sacrificially, according to his absolute free will, affirming a spiritual truth in opposition to the error of the moment. Thus revolution is not the course of history, it is the antithesis to a present framework’s logical progression (pp. 29-31). There is no such thing as “Christian principles.” Instead, we must live according to a reality. This means, for him, that we pursue a particular style of life. This style of life will lead to a future, as yet unknown, civilization.

The third chapter, “The Ends and the Means,” takes pains to show that in today’s world, means has become everything and end is no longer relevant. Man himself, who formerly was the end, has become the means (pp. 50-51). Presently, all appeals to happiness refer to that of an abstract (i.e., not real) man. Formerly, science searched for truth – now it merely searches for a better means.

Utilitarianism, usefulness, has taken over. Men are sacrificed for a future abstract utopia that can never exist. Euthanasia (and abortion?) gets rid of the “useless,” for the greater good of humanity (p. 53). For example, is the speed of an airplane a valid and sufficient aim in itself? How many men must we “sacrifice” to achieve this greater “happiness”? Having been given this longer lifetime (also through medical advances), we find that we do not know what to do with it. We save time, but many are unemployed; we save life, but we drop atomic bombs (p. 56).

So the means, not the end, justifies itself. Man is no longer master, the means extend to all spheres of life, and all ends proposed by man are useless or inadequate. Because of this, we are left with but one option: the most useful one. Thus, there simply are no options anymore. This begins with material objects, but eventually extends to man himself (p. 62).

From here, Ellul presents two truths to remember. First, to God, and thus the Christian, the end and the means are identical. Second, changing institutions (means) cannot change human conditions. For example, slavery was weakened because slaves and masters both looked for Christ’s return. Thus, our present means are unsuitable for the only end that matters – all means can be set to the right end if set in its perspective. What ultimately matters for Christians is to be and not to act.

In chapter four, “The Problem of Communication,” we are presented with a wide assortment of issues with communication in the present framework. We are unable to rely on our news (propaganda) because it is set up for the wrong end, thus it is selective (we do not see the whole picture) and follows an “explanatory myth.”

This “myth” is what glues it all together – the abstract happiness that can never exist. Practically, we know the benefit of this brand of toothpaste, but are unable to critically think about the value of an atomic bomb. Even intellectuals, in order to communicate, must commit intellectual suicide to remain in the framework of the world – a doctrine can be refuted, but one cannot question the technical method (since it is “useful” and has results; p. 92). A summary: lack of awareness plus enslavement of the intelligence to technical methods equals the absence of communication.

Ellul’s solution to this is made of two steps. First, the duty of awareness. We cannot think in mere abstract terms, but in reality. We must think of our neighbors by name, not by caricature (which is drawn for us by propaganda). We cannot only be spectators, but achieve an awareness which is only made possible by the Holy Spirit. We must rely on Him if we would truly communicate with our neighbor (p. 98-106).

Second, the consequence of our awareness is the recognition of the event in our world. We, as Christians, are witnesses to an Event: Jesus Christ. Our connection with this Event abounds not only to eternal life, but also effects daily life (p. 106-108). Thus there must be a recognition of two spheres: the profane and the sacred (p. 109).

“Isn’t simple preaching enough?” Ellul tells us that it is not (pp. 115-116). The framework of this present world makes the multitudes into swine. We ought not cast our pearls before them. “[M]en must cease to be swine, and this is not the work of grace, it is a human work” (p. 118). We must prepare them for preaching by a style of life.

So what is valuable in this book? I believe his critical evaluation of our culture, which has gone into the depths of utilitarianism, is helpful (similar to Postman’s, “Amusing Ourselves to Death”). Much of this insight is drastically eye-opening. We must always seek our true end, that of glorifying God and enjoying him forever. If always seeking this single end is interpreted to be a state of being, or style of life, I have no problem with that – much of the church is presently obsessed with utilitarianism, which works itself out this way: do, do, do, and never (or rarely) thinks.

Nevertheless, there are some things I consider to be incorrect as well. He operates with a rather superficial use of Scripture from which to gather his new presuppositions. From this, he just runs through a pile of well-placed philosophical hoops. Where is the idea of “collective sin,” an almost “open theist” conception of the future, or the idea that there is no such thing as Christian principles to be found? Where is the idea of the state and organized religion cast off, or a low view of the offices of the church? Certainly not in Scripture.