Abstract
Looking at recent church history, with the cover up of abuse, the social and psychological impact of an undue emphasis on sexuality as sinful, and Christianity becoming closely associated with nationalism and fascism, can result in one asking if the gospel message makes any difference to how Christians behave? It is not just that Christians commit evil acts, but also their failure to act against evil. In Deliver Us from Evil, John Swinton argues that Christians must not be apathetic but must recognise and fight against the evil that exists in the world. To do this, he argues that Christians need to cultivate thoughtfulness, critical thinking and learn how to live lives that resist evil in the world.
To prevent evil, one must be able to recognise evil, which is why Swinton begins by considering the nature of evil. Drawing on Susan Eastman's work on Paul, Swinton differentiates between sin and evil. Evil is understood to be a result of one's actions, whereas sin is viewed as a power that can control humanity. Swinton recognises that evil acts are not necessarily intended to be evil but are a result of human thoughtlessness and distorted perspectives. There is a need to go beyond human action, according to Swinton, and acknowledge that there are sinful forces such as economic, political, human domination, that cannot be controlled by humanity. While these forces can be identified with individuals, they remain after that individual is gone. Swinton argues that in explaining these forces one needs to go beyond the socio-political explanations and to consider how humanity is no longer loyal to God but to these powers.
Swinton also views Hannah Arendt's categories of radical evil and banal evil as being key for understanding the nature of evil. Stemming from her work on totalitarianism and Nazism, Arendt saw radical evil as not simply dehumanising others, but also destroying the concept of what it meant to be human. The actions of the Nazis were not comprehensible, one could not understand the behaviour even on the level of treating people as means to an end. The banality of evil emerged after Arendt heard Adolf Eichmann, one of the Holocaust organisers, defend his actions on the basis that he was following orders. This type of evil is a result of people being complacent about the status quo rather than thinking critically. Furthermore, there is a lack of both empathy and judgement, which leads to evil. According to this schema, these two types of evil can be connected; the banality of evil can easily support radical evil. An act can seem small and inconsequential, but because it is part of a bigger system it means that one can easily become complicit in evil.
Swinton considers the Covid-19 pandemic as revealing the banality of evil in the world. The pandemic showed that love of one's neighbour may not be the underpinnings of one's society in times of fear and uncertainty. During the pandemic, there was understandably fear, which led to selfishness, such as the hoarding of resources like vaccines. This fear meant people ignored how their actions could contribute to others’ suffering. The social distancing led to an environment of distrust, where other people could be viewed as potential threats. Swinton points out that this environment can be a factor in racist and xenophobic politics; for example, during the pandemic, there was a rise in anti-Asian discrimination. It is an example of how banal evil can become radical evil. According to Swinton, many people failed to be generous throughout the pandemic just as God is generous. Even in uncertain times, there is a need to find ways to connect, rather than destroying trust.
Swinton is right to argue that the pandemic exposed how little some people cared about their neighbours, but his analysis fails to acknowledge how this is also a result of people's carelessness. As the lockdowns ended, it was people's carelessness that the immunocompromised people feared rather than other people's fear. For example, there were Christians who resented the limitations on church services and, believing that they should not live in fear, campaigned to attend church. The absence in Swinton's analysis is important for two reasons, firstly, because to understand evil, one must also recognise negligence. Secondly, it needs to be recognised that a lack of concern for others is corrosive for building trust, not just fear.
Swinton also considers the radical evil of the Rwandan genocide and asks whether the lessons of history have been learnt. He chose the Rwandan genocide specifically as it was a genocide of Christians by other Christians in a country that had high numbers of church attendance. Unlike other conflicts, Christians killed Christians who belonged to the same church; therefore, it was not a sectarian conflict. These aspects of the genocide raise the question of why is the ethics of the gospel unable to prevent or stop the violence? Looking at interviews with some of the killers, Swinton observes that they felt that their Christian identity could be put aside. The religious practices were not seen to be related to their everyday life and therefore, it was unable to challenge the political and racial propaganda. There was a failure in making Christianity people's primary identity. In looking at how identity played a role in Rwanda, Swinton warns against seeing identity as a choice because external forces, like social media, could be really telling one what to believe. These external forces can use these identities to create binaries and hatred between different groups. Making Christianity one's primary identity is not envisioned by Swinton as destroying other sources of identity, but these other sources should not create division because one must recognise the diversity of Christ's body. Ultimately, one is always expected to be a Christian.
Reading Swinton's chapter on Rwanda, there are aspects that remind me of my home country, Ireland, which globally has been associated with Catholicism and had high weekly mass attendance, which in 1975 was at 91 per cent. One might ask what that faith amounted to when the history of Catholicism in Ireland contains many stories of abuse at the hands of the Church. One example is the Magdalene Laundries which were usually run by Catholic religious orders, and where ‘fallen’ women were forced to work. The unmarried mothers who were sent there were separated from their babies. In asking how this could have happened, one might suggest that like the Rwandan killers, Christianity was not the primary identity of the religious orders. But they justified their actions theologically; the labour was seen to be penitence for the women's sins. Swinton warns against a ‘distorted Christian identity’ in relation to Christian white supremacists and argues that the response should not be to dismiss these people as not real Christians (p. 99). But ultimately, he still characterises it as being the same as problem as Rwanda, where cultural identities are prioritised over the Christian identity. However, the reality is that identities can blur and for Irish people in the twentieth century, it would not always be clear where Catholicism and Irishness began and ended. The Magdalene women were seen to bring shame to both Ireland and the Church, and therefore, they were wrongfully hidden. There is a need for a more complex understanding of identity that does not treat identity as fixed but instead acknowledges that lack of clear distinction. Otherwise, there is the risk of falling for simplistic narratives about the past. However, Swinton is right about the need for critical thinking and better theology. In Ireland, the Church was seen to need protecting, which meant that there was societal silence about the known reality of what was happening in those laundries.
The discussion of evil leads Swinton to consider how Christians can develop skills to recognise and fight against evil. He stresses the importance of both formation and action. Formation means becoming tough-minded, where one's firm commitment is towards hating evil. Swinton is aware of the dangers of the rhetoric of hatred and argues that while one can hate evil, the victory over evil is done with love. It involves thoughtfulness because, as Swinton repeatedly argues, a lack of concern or interest in others leads to evil. Religious practices, particularly the Eucharist, should help to form a Christian identity that can fight against evil. The Eucharist is envisioned by Swinton as a place of reconciliation, fellowship, critique, and discernment. It should lead one to look at the world sacramentally beyond the sacraments. He knows that engagement with the ritual is not enough to make one a good Christian. He argues that for the ritual to be authentic, it must be lived out beyond the confines of the church; otherwise, it is just a personal meal. This means the Eucharist requires a genuine examination of conscience.
The call for critical thinking and discernment by Swinton will be welcomed by many who are concerned by how Christianity has been taken hold by ideological forces. But the book is short, which leads to the sense that more needs to be said about what is preventing critical thinking today. For example, Swinton does not explore how there is no longer a shared sense of what is true and real. He references propaganda in Rwanda but does not explore misinformation on the internet which raises new problems. Misinformation easily spreads online, and it can be unclear how to understand a situation with multiple conflicting sources, particularly in times of crises. For Christians, it can seem like they exist in different worlds from each other depending on what media they consume, and therefore, they have different ideas of what problems need to be prioritised. Even within a particular church, there will be much disagreement about what makes a trusted source. However, there is a tendency to over-emphasise the role of misinformation and ignore people's agency. The social conditions are important; however, one is both impacted by information and one's existing identities and commitments also impact how one interprets information. This is why formation and identity are crucial because one's ethical commitments will inform how one responds to new information. But it needs to also be acknowledged how researching on the internet can feel like one is exercising one's critical thinking skills even when one is falling for a conspiracy theory.
Swinton outlines basic principles that form a Christian identity. For example, he argues that hatred, violence, and judgementalism are not included in that identity. A Christian can only hate evil and must do so with love. There is a similar problem here as with the phrase ‘hate the sin, not the sinner’, with which most Christians will not disagree, but it is in the detail of how one loves that there is disagreement. Today, many see their Christian identity as related to the fight against immigration, the LGBT+ community, and socialism. They see themselves as speaking the hard, uncomfortable truth to a society that is unwilling to recognise evil, but it can be a cover for hatred and cruelty, though they will claim to continually respect everyone involved and this raises concerns about the effectiveness of arguments to the contrary. The only principle of Swinton that might be difficult to manipulate is the idea that Christians are to ‘build relationships across creedal, racial, sexual, and national boundaries’ (p. 103). It goes against the idea of a pure insular Christian community and is connected to the challenge of how the Eucharist can facilitate discernment which requires thinking about liturgical practices. Some churches are resistant to liturgical change and liturgies have become associated with ideologies. Not always explicitly or intentionally, liturgies can become part of the fight against the evils of modernity. Christianity and harmful ideologies have become entangled as Christians will select parts of the tradition to support their argument. Swinton's book highlights the need for good theology, character formation, and praxis but to facilitate this there is a need to move from the general to the specific, which requires more analysis, detailed argumentation, and guidance in Christian communities.