Ivan Ilyin’s defense of Traditional Christianity in the face of Evil
Book Review: On the Resistance to Evil by Force
Before we begin this delightful little romp of Christian Recovery, a few words about the author. He was one of the most articulate defenders of the Faith and opposed the evil of communism. His efforts with the combat brigades (The Whites) against the Bolsheviks, supporting the faithful Monarchy, are historical artifacts that deserve our admiration and praise It is of course no surprise to us today that Ilyin lost to the evil forces of Lenin and Stalin. Yet, today, while people rail that Putin is EXACTLY like communist Russia, nothing could be further from the truth.1
Introduction
This little tome spends a large chunk criticizing (justly) Leo Tolstoy. For those who do not know, Tolstoy is one of the originators of peace at all costs—that is you cannot defend yourself against evil. You should “turn the other cheek” so to speak. Ilyin considers this an heresy. In fact, even the Church Fathers of the time condemned Tolstoy as a sinner and a quisling for the communists.((see the primary documents from Church It did not help his case that the communists did indeed like Tolstoy quite a bit. He was the perfect psy-op to lure Christians into complacence and accept “history’s” end.
Illyin’s own scholarship was somewhat approving of Hegel, whom he admired. However, any connection to Hegel in this volume is absent. Most appropriately, Ilyin was against “westernizers” who were making attempts to change the character of Russia to their design of organized life, and living. In this sense, you might call him the anti-hegelian. Not all peoples are in the course of time uncontrollably careening to one place. He was not a globalist. He believed that Oswald Spengler (The Decline of the West) presented a more correct assessment of the inherent (systemic!) problems associated with modern western liberalism.
You who Love the Lord, hate evil; The Lord keeps the souls of His saints; He shall deliver them from the hand of sinners
Psalm 96 (97): 10
While Ilyin may have been impressed with Hegel, he believed Hegel made a grave error—that is his relegating God out of existence, or making him even compatible with the materialist world.2 Ilyn believed that God could not be harnessed, or made compatible with, this world. There are just some things that cannot be bridged—and God is Holy while we are not.
First and foremost, Ilyin’s belief was that Russia was made great (before the communist insurrection) by its faith; by its Orthodoxy. Whatever else he believed in the realm of political philosophy, Ilyn is clear just what is higher—the Church, or in any case God.
There is no man in this time, not even Leo Strauss, who made the attempt to blend reason and revelation in such a distinct way. Yet, unlike Strauss, Ilyin certainly chose a side: revelation.
Part 1: The Internal Readiness of your Soul to Resist Evil
Half of the book is spent not just on a criticism of Tolstoy, but on the ordering of the Soul that will be pleasing to God. This first step is necessary if one is to pick up the sword to slay evil. The corruption brought by Tolstoy thus placates evil. As Ilyin notes, placating evil soon leads to the acceptance of evil, until that transforms into the full defense of evil.
The most dire act for the soul is doing nothing in the face of evil. Why? Because that gives evil its license to continue doing what it is doing, which allows it to expand its scope. on a personal level it corrupts the Soul; on a political level, it corrupts a people and robs them of righteousness. It encourages those who are evil to broaden their mayhem. This especially afflicts those who practice non-resistance—that is who believe in non-resistance.
There is much in the foregoing chapters speaking to not only the nature of evil, but how it can compromise the internal Soul of man, even the Faithful man. These internal violences on man are not physical. They are spiritual. Ilyin’s aim is for his readers to understand how their internal state may indeed be comprised by evil without them really understanding it is happening to them. This development is in part why Ilyin’s book was so urgent—the insidiousness of evil basically subdued the Faith, making Christians a part of their own destruction.3
A morally noble soul seeks through his love a religiously correct, strong-willed response to the violent pressure of an external evil
Ilyin, p. 105.
The individual must prepare himself for such a conflict. There should be no personal pride, or sentiment of “revenge” present in the faithful warrior. This is more difficult than it seems because he means the anger placed upon an enemy must not be from any emotional attachment to self. Further, it makes things more difficult to defeat evil, for it also requires patience, and a way of doing that does not equal evil ways—that is it would be more efficient to defeat evil using less holy means, but in doing so, you are effected—your soul is harmed in the process, and slowly you will drift from God.
Part 2: Duty of Resistance Emanates from Love
Leave it to Ilyin to recover the original meaning of love. Modern “Christians” seem to think that means you must submit yourself to all sorts of abuse. But, Ilyin disabuses us of such heresy.
Real love, certainly Christian love, is not permissive. It is not tolerant of laxity. That is, love cannot love all things.4 Let us take the most common argument from the moderns: you MUST love your enemy! You MUST forgive them! Ilyin is basically saying, that’s all bullshit, and spiritually naive. That argument serves the interests of evil, not the holy.
The teaching of the Bible and Church has always been we forgive our personal enemies. We are commanded to forgive them, but we are not commanded to forgive the enemies of God.5 To put another point on it, we neither have the duty or the right to forgive for others what a third person has done to them. In other words, there are limitations to forgiveness. In another reality check, Ilyin notes that just because you may forgive someone who has personally harmed you in some way, this does not mean that that same person will cease his villainy. In addition to the fact that we cnanot forgive people who are enemies of God, we also ought not expect the person who we personally forgive will ever see the light. In the end, we ought never forgive 1) someone who has wronged another, and 2) forgive anyone who is an enemy of God. Love is not the remedy for evil to change its ways.
While Love is the motivation for resistance, and forgiveness, we moderns must be cautious to not have an unreasonable kindness or sympathy for men. We must withhold our love for man because, in part, man is a sinful being, and we cannot see into their heart their many motivations. In fact, withholding our love of men is in fact an act of love.
The considerations of love, then, are actually encouragements for us to know ourselves and protect our souls. Knowing ourselves is a great educator to knowing others. We know our sins, and hence, we know that others may not be as transparent in their own consideraiton and maintenance of their own souls. All this means, we must be perceptive to evil and be able to spot it for spotting it is the one skill we need to resist evil.
Part 3: Resistance of Evil—Force and the Sword
Evil is a serious concern in this world. The reason for that is because it is “united” and “aggressive.”6 Those who do not resist it, join it. Certainly they assist it in its cause and aims. To not realize what evil is capable of doing is naive—and most people are naive—they are called “conspiracy theorists.” Ilyin doe not say that explcitily, but this is what he means. People who think they are being good, and doing good by not reisting are the greatest promoters of it.
The deviousness of evil means, literally, it will do anything to achieve its aims, including lies, and blaming good people for things it is about to do.
The whole history of mankind consists in the fact that in different epochs, and in different communities, the best people perished, attacked by the worst, and this continued until the best ones dared to meet the worst with systematic and organized resistance.
p. 153.
Evil does not stop, or is halted, until it is resisted. This is a nice way to say, it must be killed. Evil must be removed. There are 3 reasons to stop evil. 1) it shows others what is tolerated, by defending the soul of others. It is, we might say, a political teacher. By stopping evil we have a better chance to preserve the Soul of others so they can pursue God. 2) resistance to evil protects others from crimes. 3) resistance to evil prevents other from being seduced by evil.
In all these reasons there is a common thread—the protection of tghe souls of others, by standing up against those who are enemies of God. Politically on this earth, it means to give the people the necessary encouragement to order their souls without the temptation of corruption.
Taking the sword to evil (to draw together the above) should never be done for the self. It is a duty and a sacrifice. This means that it is not a sin, unless, there are personal motives for the resistance. When the time calls for it, we do this and not turn it over to God because we are servants of God.7
It should be noted that this entire aergument is one that rejects the stupid unqualified statement, “he who lives by the sword, dies by the sword.” The operative word here is “lives.” The resistance to evil is not done by “living” by the sword. It is done as a reluctant, but necessary act by the servants of God. This means that employing the sword is not an unqualified unrighteous act. More so, it is unrighteous to do nothing in the face of evil. Ilyin accounts the factual admmonishment to the non-resistance “believers” that Christ never, not once, condemned the sword in military affairs.
Conclusion—Force & Cleansing
The ancient teaching of the Church meant for the sword to be wielded as a meaningful service, and a special burden and accountable act. It is an unselfish act if done correctly. It is also an act where, the love of God is shown brither than the love of this world—for those who would never take it up in the face of evil, love this world more than they love God. Subtext—Christianity is not for cowards.
While the processes of resistance of evil are grave, the internal ordering of one’s own soul is the most important aspect of Ilyin’s book more than the actual act of resistance. Killing might be simple, but the motives of the person defending the Faith against Evil is far more arduous.
When the Faith is under attack—which is what evil actually does—war against the Church and the creation—it is the duty of the Faithful to take up the sword, and defeat evil. To fear death is to accept the sweet dripping lies of the Evil One. Dying in the faith is heroism that is more pleasing to God than letting Evil destroy one’s own soul.
It is laughable that many people on the left call Ilyin a “fascist” which is what communists do to anyone not a communist. Suffice to say, he was nothing close to that since his thought predates 1917 ideology. For his part, it is CLEAR Ilyin rejected fascism for he rejected them, which led to their hostility to him and the confiscation of his works. Like Communists, their siblingss, the fascist, hates rejection. But for leftists—that is communists who cannot imagine a Holy Divine– the World did not begin until that date. The reality is that modern leftists are pissed at Putin and Russia because they left communism.
it should be noted that Ilyin denied he was an Hegelian.
And in reality is this not what has happened in the West?
pp.118-119, 121.
p. 123.
p. 149.
p. 184.