52 pages • 1 hour read
Philip Paul HallieA modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
In February 1943, André Trocmé was away from home visiting parishioners who led the groups known as responsables, which were critical in Le Chambon’s rescue efforts. While Trocmé was out, Major Silvani and another officer of the Vichy police force arrived. Magda, Trocmé’s wife, showed them to Trocmé’s office. When he returned, they arrested him. Magda worried that his suitcase was not prepared. The villagers quickly learned of the arrest and came to say goodbye, bringing him gifts. Magda invited the police to eat supper with them before leaving, but Silvani was so overwhelmed with the moral weight of his orders that he couldn’t eat. As Trocmé was led to the police car, the villagers formed a line and sang a hymn in support of him. Silvani and his lieutenant then arrested Trocmé’s associates Édouard Theis and Roger Darcissac for participating in the refugee rescue operation. (In later years, Trocmé defended Silvani to restore his reputation in France.) Magda followed the police until they reached the town limits. The men were put on a train to the internment camp of Saint-Paul d’Eyjeaux.
The text describes the history of Protestantism in France. Until the 18th century, during the French Revolution, Protestants were persecuted in France to varying degrees. The history of Le Chambon included the regular arrest and execution of Protestant pastors who defied the law of the land by peacefully practicing their religion. The book ties this history of the quiet and peaceful resistance of French Protestants to Trocmé’s sermons and actions during the German occupation.
On the way to Saint-Paul d’Eyjeaux, the officers stopped in Limoges, where a narrow-minded police captain condemned the prisoners for helping Jews. Trocmé was struck by the banality of people who failed to question whether something was right or wrong. At the camp, conditions were bad, but the prisoners were relatively healthy and in good spirits. They generally welcomed the three men, perhaps in part because of the gifts the newcomers received during their first month in the camp. Trocmé and Theis requested permission and space to hold Protestant church services and received it. Their approach to theology, morality, and nonviolent resistance intrigued other prisoners. The officers in charge became concerned about the popularity of the services, but Trocmé and the others adjusted their discussion so that it appeared they were defending the Vichy government rather than discussing the overlapping morality of communist and Protestant resistance. More than a month passed, and the men were nearly released until Trocmé and Theis refused to sign the oath to follow all government orders. Darcissac signed the oath (already having signed a similar document to remain a public schoolteacher) and was released.
When they returned to the camp, their companions criticized them for refusing to lie. However, only a short time later, they were released without having to sign the oath. The other prisoners were transported either to Poland or Silesia and died either from the stress of hard labor or in the gas chamber.
Trocmé was quick to love and quick to anger; he was the primary moving factor in the Le Chambon resistance. In contrast, Theis was largely solid and consistent. Trocmé was born to a French Protestant father and a German mother (in the same area of Belgium in which John Calvin was born) and lived a far more cosmopolitan life than many French Protestants. His French relatives were upper class and fairly wealthy. He spent most of his childhood insulated from the world. One afternoon, while he was playing with his nephew, a poor man stopped at their garden gate. He judged the boys for being rich, and Trocmé discovered a gap between his experience and that of the poor. Rather than making Trocmé bitter, this experience led to his commitment to serve the poor rather than the upper classes.
When Trocmé was 10, his father lost his temper while driving in the countryside, and the resulting accident killed Trocmé’s mother. This was a formative event in Trocmé’s life that established his attitude toward the sanctity of life. Trocmé’s father believed (and Trocmé agreed) that he was morally responsible for his wife’s death. As a result, Trocmé’s dedication to nonviolence applied equally to victims and perpetrators of violence.
World War I and the German occupation of his city punctuated Trocmé’s early adulthood. Eventually, his family fled the city and experienced loss and hunger. However, during the occupation, Trocmé saw German soldiers exhibit massive cruelty toward Russian prisoners who were forced to work. He joined a Protestant union of students to help Russian prisoners while simultaneously finding an outlet for his emotions. Trocmé’s father was pragmatic and refused to discuss or give attention to strong emotion.
During the occupation, Trocmé struggled with anger toward the Germans and a strong sense of French patriotism. Two events strongly affected him and complicated his worldview. When he saw a group of German soldiers returning, wounded, from the front, one so badly that his jaw was made of bandages, Trocmé couldn’t bring himself to hate someone so desperately injured. Later, Trocmé met a German soldier named Kindler, who was temporarily living in Trocmé’s house. Kindler explained to Trocmé that he was a conscientious objector and, though a German soldier, carried no weapon and did his job without violence. Kindler had discovered a deep faith that negated the need to protect himself through violence and instead led him to trust in God.
Trocmé studied at the Union Theological Seminary of New York City. Though he admired the goals of the “Social Gospel” that the seminary endorsed (62), he missed the deep intimacy of a personal relationship with God that had led him to theology as a calling. In tutoring the sons of John D. Rockefeller, Jr., he discovered another element of Americanism: a nearly religious dedication to material success. When Trocmé met Magda Grilli, her matter-of-fact empathy and care for others impressed him. Although they disagreed on religion (given Magda’s experience of being forced into a convent), they found common ground in their core morality. They fell in love and returned to France in 1926 to marry.
Trocmé and Magda lived in two other parishes before going to Le Chambon. In the first parish, they started their family. The birth of Nelly, their first daughter, caused a massive hemorrhage, and Trocmé experienced psychological egoism firsthand. Although he was worried about his wife, he was surprised to discover how grateful he was that his life would continue.
While serving as the pastor of the poor mining parish of Sin-le-Noble, he helped the community rise above the challenges of a life in poverty. A man with alcoholism named Célisse initially appeared to be a massive success story. With Trocmé’s help, Célisse transformed, becoming Trocmé’s most vocal proponent, which aided him in helping others in the parish. However, Célisse could maintain sobriety only in Trocmé’s presence. When Trocmé and his family left for Le Chambon due to the children’s illness in the polluted environment, Célisse died by suicide because he couldn’t avoid temptation in Trocmé’s absence. Though the story of Célisse tells of a kind of failure, the text argues that it is also a testament to the deep change that Trocmé affected in Célisse.
Throughout, the text intersperses French words in the English narrative: “The winter wind, la burle” is one example (16). This integration of French grounds readers in the setting and pays homage to the village’s culture. One minor theme throughout the book is the influence of history on the individual. Trocmé’s Huguenot ancestry influenced him to empathize with victims of oppression. Similarly, the village’s history of Protestantism in a largely hostile France encouraged the residents to accept the necessity of resisting governmental authority when that authority acted in opposition to their beliefs. The inclusion of the French language as it was used in the village integrates the culture of the Chambonnais with the story that the book is telling.
Philosophical and historical context and discussion are woven into the text. In the first chapter, emotional moments in the description of Trocmé’s arrest thematically introduce Public Versus Private Action through the parishioners’ unprompted goodbye visits to Trocmé and the gifts sent to him in the camp, which helped him gain influence with the other prisoners. The text’s focus on the acts of the parishioners helps illustrate the history of the village while maintaining a focus on Trocmé and the Chambonnais. The accounts of Trocmé’s interactions with his parishioners, people along the way to the camp, and the other prisoners enable readers to connect emotionally to and become invested in the story and generate interest in the historical background that philosophically underpins the book’s arguments.
The story of Trocmé’s life before Le Chambon demonstrates the importance of Trocmé, his friends, and his wife. These background experiences enhance their portraits and help contextualize their moral choices and struggles. In particular, Trocmé’s discovery of the depth and intimacy of his faith in contrast with Magda’s inclination to reject faith thematically highlights The Conflicted Nature of Faith. Although Magda and Trocmé approached morality from different directions, their core agreement on what is right allowed them to build a strong and successful marriage. Trocmé’s intimate relationship with his faith was sometimes separate from the dictates of the church and its dominant teachings. This helps explain why Trocmé could choose to marry someone who questioned her faith and why religion was never a barrier to Trocmé’s nonviolence or helpful action.
Anecdotes and specific experiences throughout the book connect directly with the people it describes and the work that they did. This personalization connects readers more directly to the individuals in Le Chambon and provides an extended series of examples that highlight and extend the book’s philosophical discussions on ethics. It associates religious factors with particular individuals to maintain an impartial, third-party perspective, allowing the book to explain philosophical ethics and their relationship to theology without taking a position on whether the theology is true.
Books on Justice & Injustice
View Collection
Challenging Authority
View Collection
Community
View Collection
Fate
View Collection
Forgiveness
View Collection
French Literature
View Collection
Good & Evil
View Collection
Memorial Day Reads
View Collection
Military Reads
View Collection
Mortality & Death
View Collection
Order & Chaos
View Collection
Philosophy, Logic, & Ethics
View Collection
Power
View Collection
Religion & Spirituality
View Collection
Safety & Danger
View Collection
Truth & Lies
View Collection
War
View Collection
World War II
View Collection