On Jacques Ellul''s Rejection of Institutions

 

From a FB exchange on Jaques Ellul, and his rejection of institutions--religious and political.  I wrote: 


Ellul is a proud nominalist and anti-realist:

At different times I myself have already declared in favor of nominalism. One can talk about humanity, but in itself it is merely a word, which is useful for the purpose of denoting the totality of people, and which serves well in reflection and communication, but which is never anything more. The millions of individuals do not constitute one real humanity. Nor is there one human nature that is always identical and immutable and that one can find in each individual. Nor is there any rational being that is the same through space

and time. For me, such things are mere names and no more.  https://afkimel.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/what-i-believe-jacques-ellul.pdf

Nominalists can only speak of collections, not communities, because they can have no conception of participation in anything that could be real that transcends the individual. Ellul is left with an apophatic vision of God and human beings, and thus religion and politics.

 

I do not doubt Ellul's faith; but I do disagree with his metaphysics and politics. I am not a nominalist, and I think analogous language gives us a way to avoid apophaticism.