Progress Toward an Unthinkable Consummation: Sin and the Evolution of Human Consciousness

Boston University

OpenBU

http://open.bu.edu

Boston Theological Institute

Journal of Faith and Science Exchange

2012-08-21

Progress Toward an Unthinkable

Consummation: Sin and the

Evolution of Human Consciousness

https://hdl.handle.net/2144/3974

Progress

Toward

an

Unthinkable Consummation:

Sin

and the

Evolution

of

Human

Consciousness

Kate Layzer

Andover

Newton

TheologicalSchool

Michael

Polanyi has

argued

that tacit

knowing

—

the consolidation

and

integration of

earlierachievements

from which

to launch further

advances

—plays

an

essential rolein

evo-lution. Tacit

knowledge

isoftentransmittedby observation

and

imitation

—

what

anthropolo-gist

Rene

Girard

calls mimesis.

Girard

suggests that this mimetic tendency has

had

both

beneficial

and

negative effects: violentoutbreaks of mimetic rivalryanu)ngearly hominids

necessitated the

development

ofritualcontrols, representing the begiiuiing ofculture.

Be-neathall culture,auniversalscapegoating

mechanism

—

hunuuikind's"original sin"

—

remains

hidden.

Jewish

and

Christianscripturespresenta countervailingcultural force,challenging

human

beingstodevelopindirectionsnot

dependent

on

rivalry

and

violence.

In

the

image

of

God?

Then

God

said,"Letus

make

human-kindinour image, accordingtoour

likeness....

So

God

created

humankind

inthedivineimage,intheimageof

God

weretheycreated,male and

female

God

createdthem.

(Gen2:26-27)

Has

sin

become

extinct?

As

opponents of

thetheoryof evolution increasinglyfind

theni-selvesatthe fringesof theological discourse,

itisdifficult tosaywhat,ifanything,remains

ofthat story ofthe Fall that served

theolo-gians sowellforsolong.

Adam,

Eve,

and

the

devil have been cededto thefolklorists and

psychologists. Evil is confined to the

mind

andthedetemiinisms ofhistory,orrelativized. Without an agreed-upon moralbase,

who

is

tosay

what

is

"bad"

or

"good"?

YetthestoryoftheFallservedan

impor-tant function,

now

often overlooked. It

ex-istedtosafeguardtheobstinatebelief,shared

by Jews

and

Christians, in the

goodness

of

creation.

The

temptationto rejectthe world

andmaterial thingsisneverfar

from

the

spiri-tual quest.

What

better

way

to explain the

scientific evidence

—

that nature is ruled

by

disease, corruption, and death

—

than to say,

with Platonism,that

God

never

had

anything

to

do

withthe

making

of suchaworld?

Chris-tianity fought hardto reject this option,

por-traying a

good

creationenslaved

by

sin and

"groaning"forliberation

(Rom

8:22).

Human

beings bear the very

image

of

God,

it says,

albeitdistorted

by

sin. InChrist,therenewal

ofthatoriginalgoodnessisalreadyunderway.

With

evolution accepted asreality,

what

becomes

ofthisaccount? There is

no

simple answer. ButI

would

liketosuggesta starting

place: the forbidden tree, the tree of the

knowledge

of

good

andevil,

from

which Eve

and

Adam

ate.

This paperisaboutsinandthe evolution

of

knowing.

Itcalls

upon

the

work

of

two

modern-day

scientists, the chemist and

phi-losopherMichael Polanyi andthe

antliropolo-gist

Rene

Girard,toexplorethe relationship

between

consciousnessand sin.

Anthropol-ogy,likeallthesocialsciences, has

been

criti-cized

by

the natural sciences as"fuzzy

sci-ence." Nevertheless,becauseitseekstogive areliable account of

human

societyand cul-ture

from

itsearliest origins,

making

senseof

them from

a biological as well as a social, historical,andculturalpoint of view, thereis

reasonto

hope

thatitcouldeventually helpto

andthe natural sciences. Girard,forone,has daredtocrossthatdivide. Hisinterest in

vio-lence

and

thesacred leads

him

to

engage

the

Bibleandthe Christianproclamationin

ways

that challenge everyone, of whatever

camp,

tohearthatproclamation anew,

and

toaskif

we

arenot, afterall,partofthat Biblestory.

Michael

Polanyi

and

the evolution

of

meaning

So

outofthegroundthe

Lord

God

formedeveryanimal ofthefieldand

everybirdoftheair,andbroughtthem

tothe

man

toseewhathewouldcall

them;and whateverthe

man

called

everylivingcreature,that

was

itsname.

(Gen2:19) Polanyibegins withthebasic evolution-arypremisethatthe highest

forms

oflifeare

traceabletothe lowliestbeginnings. This is

notto say,with

neo-Darwinism,

thathigher

Sacrifice

ritually

repeats the

founding

murder

and

reclaims

its

beneficial

effects.

The

original

violence

is

unleashed,

then

spent;

thereafter

what

is

addressed

in

ritual

is

latent violence.

levelsareultimatelyreducibleto,or logically

explainedby,thelaws of physics

and

chem-istry

—

aclaim hecriticizesas "inadequate"

and

"fundamentally vague."' Polanyi asks

how

higherlevels

emerge from

lowerlevels.

What

causes

comprehensive

entities with machine-likefunctionstodevelop

from

non-livingmatter?

Such

entitiescan

no

more

be

explainedorpredicted

on

thebasisof

physi-cal chemical laws than Shakespeare's

son-nets can be explained or predicted

on

the

basis

of

grammar

and

alphabet. Polanyi

writes:

The

lawsgoverningthe particularsin

themselveswouldnever accountforthe

organizingprinciplesofahigherentity

whichtheyform.[...]

No

levelcan gain

controloverits

own

boundary

condi-tionsandhence cannot bring into

existenceahigherlevel,theoperations

ofwhichwouldconsistincontrolling theseboundaryconditions.-'^

Accidentalmutationsplay arole inevolution, butPolanyiwrites:

Idenythataccidentaladvantagescan

everadduptotheevolution ofa

new

setof operationalprinciples, asitisnot

intheirnaturetodoso.^

Changes

oftypethatleadto

new

levelsof

ex-istencereflectnot

random

chancebutdrive,an

"autonomous

thrust ofevolutionary ascent"'

thatPolanyi seesas

common

toall living or-ganisms: a

hunger

fordiscovery, agroping afterthetruth inresponseto"intimations"that

anovelachievementiswithinreach.

Polanyienvisions thesource ofthisdrive as a "phylogenic field,"

comparable

to the

morphogenetic

field that guides an

embryo

tomaturity. Inthisfieldofpotentialities,

evo-lutionaryachievements

V are

drawn

to

work

to-^

ward

their

own

realiza-'

tion, in the

same

way

'

human

beings_strain

to-^

ward

the discovery of ^

what

is still

unknown

and

beyond

reach.

Groping

toward higher

levels is an enterprise

^

common

to all life, he

argues.

Human

consciousness is simply the

culmination ofan evolutionarydrive all

be-ingsshare towardself-realizationand

awak-ening.

"An

innate affinity for

making

con-tact with reality

moves

our thoughts," he

writes.

A

common

restlessnessdrives the

pro-tozoan, thechemist,andthereligious seeker.

We

may

envisage thenacosmicfield

whichcalled forthallthese centres [of livingcreatures] byofferingthema short-lived, limited,hazardous

opportunityformaking

some

progress

oftheir

own

towards an unthinkable

consummation.

And

thatisalso,I

believe,

how

aChristianisplaced

when

worshippingGod.^

As

the

crowning

achievement

and

exem-plar of this

upward

struggle,

human

con-sciousness

remains dynamic:

a

work

in

progress. For Polanyi, there is

no

arriving, onlystriving. Evolvingto

new

levelsisa

pro-cess ofconsolidating

and

integrating earlier

achievements to serve as a launching-place

forfutureadvances.

As

thistakes place, past

discoveries

become

present"tacit"

knowing:

thatwealth ofinnateskilland understanding that

human

persons possess without being

aware

ofit.

They

know

more

—

much

more

—

than they can tell, Polanyi observes.^ This

pattern,

which

Polanyi refers to as the "in-dwelling"ofknowledge,isrepeatedeach time

a

new

skillis mastered, the perfonnance of

which depends

inlargepart

on

beingableto

incorporate earlierachievements without

fo-cusing

on

them.

A

piano virtuoso attends

"from"

theskillsof

manual

dexterity,acquired

throughyearsoftraining,"to" thehigherlevel toward

which

sheisstriving: themusic,

which

bothincorporates

and

transcendsmechanics.

For

human

beingsespecially,teachersplay

acrucial role in

what

isableto be achieved.

What

makes

human

beings so sophisticated

is precisely their ability totransmit

and

re-ceive

knowledge

—

mostly tacit

knowledge,

Polanyi says

—

by

observationandimitation.

Such

imitation is based

on

thetrust, present

from

infancy,thatthe

meaning

of

what

is

be-ing imitated,

unknown

at the time, will

be-come

clearlateron.

One

cannot,

by

defini-tion,

know

what

thenextlevel

up

willbelike: Thatis

beyond

one's grasp,andone

must

trust

that teachersand models, those

who

beckon

from

above,

know

something

new

and impor-tant.

Girard:

in

the

beginning,

murder

and

mayhem

So

when

the

woman

sawthatthetree

was

goodforfood,andthatitwasa delighttotheeyes,andthatthetree

was

tobedesiredto

make

onewise,she tookofitsfruitandate;andshealso

gave

some

toherhusband,

who

was

withher,andheate.[...]

The

man

named

hiswifeEve, because shewas themotherofalltheliving.

(Gen3:6,20)

Polanyicallsattentiontothecreative

dy-namism

ofcreation,culminatingin transcen-dent

human

beingscapableofuniversal

stan-dards

and

timelessaims.This

overcoming

of

subjective interests

by

"universal intent,"he

writes,is aunique eventinthe historyofthe

cosmos

andrepresents a

movement

toan

en-tirely

new

level.

The news

is not all

good,

however.

Polanyi

was

himselfkeenlyawarethat

human

freedom

isoftenexercisedin

ways

that

do

not

promote

life;thatthecapacityforelevation

—

spiritual, moral, intellectual, andcreative

—

isatthe

same

timethe

measure

ofa capacity

forharm.

The same

beings

who

discovered language, music, and painting also learned,

somewhere

alongtheway,touse

weapons.

Is a

non-human

animal capable of sin?

Most would

say not.

At what

evolutionary

moment,

though,doesa

hominid

ceasetobe an animaland

become

aculpable

human

be-ingcapable of offending

God?

Istheresuch

a

moment?

Physicist and religious

philoso-pher

John

Polkinghorne speculates that the

shiftprobably tookplace gradually,although

in the familiar story

from

Genesis, itis

"re-membered"

as

one

event:

The

Fallisnot tobe understoodas a singledisastrous ancestral actfrom whichallourtroublesHow. Yet inthe

courseof

human

evolutiontheremust

havebeenaperiodofdawning

consciousness oftheself,accompanied

bydawningconsciousness ofGod,in whichtheformerwasasserted against

theclaims ofthelatter. The

conse-quencesofthatturning

away

fromthe

divinepresencewould find

embodiment

inresulting culturalandsocial struc-tures,therebypropagatingfrom

generationtogeneration an influence

reinforcing the falseassertionofthe self

ofitsautonomy. Itisevenconceivable

that thiswouldbringabouta genetic

biastowardsa certainkindof

human

nature.... Inthis

way

onecan

under-standtodaywhatismeantbythe

traditional theologicalconcept of an

entailof

human

sinfulnessfrom which

we

needdeliveranceby God'sgrace.**

The

work

of anthropologist

Rene

Girard

beginsatthispointinthe storyof

human

evo-lution

—

atthetransition

from hominid

to

hu-man

being

—

theentry notonlyinto social

or-ganization and culture, but intoa world of

as

human

freedom. Here,

where

theanimal

selfistranscended,Girard

would

agree,isthe

root

and

source ofthat "entailof

human

sin-fulness"to

which

the Bibletestifies. Girard

would

disagree,however,thatthe originalsin

was

selfishness. ForGirard, sin begins with

the discoverythat

one

can

aim

a stone and kill

someone.

Throughout

most

ofthe natural world, aggression is associated with survival: with

hunger, self-defense,andsocialcompetition.

Itserves beneficial functionsandiscontained

by

naturallimits.

Human

violenceis

distinc-tive in

two

ways.

One

is the "overreaction" factor:

Human

beingsare

much more

prone

toaggressiverivalrywithintheir

own

social

group.

Human

violenceisalso distinctive in

that it tends to intensify out ofcontrol

—

to

escalate and spread, often with catastrophic

consequences. This behavior is especially

striking

when

one

considers thatthe closest

related species are all, as Girard pointsout,

"peaceable

omnivores."

What

happened?

Why

are

human

beingsdifferent? Girardsays

thatit

came

about

by

chance.

During

the process of hominization our

ancestorsveryrapidly

became

carnivoresand

hunters. Strong discharges ofadrenalineare

necessaryatthecritical

moment

ofthe hunt.

Once

scapegoating

was

introduced, however,

it

quickly

turned

into the

defining

reality

beyond

which

itis

difficult

or impossible

to

perceive

alternatives.

This

insight

is

the

reason

why,

from

a

religious

perspective,

revelation

is

so

crucial

for

human

moral

development.

Such

dischargescanalsooccurunder

differ-ent conditions, as in the middle of afamily

group, forexample, under the effect ofany sortofdisturbance.''

Adrenalinereleaseisveryuseful

and

also

verydangerous,oftentaking the

form

of

ex-tremerage.

Denied

outlets,Girardwrites, this

rage"tendstoturntowardthose

who

are

clos-est and

most

cherished."'"

_One

_{can readily}

imagine the

havoc

this

would wreak

in

hu-man

communities

unless

some

means

could befoundforkeepingrageundercontrol.

The

threatis

compounded

by

the

human

propensity for turning objects into tools.

Among

most

species,violent rivalryisrarely

fatal, because fighting leads to injury. It is

difficult to bite, slash, orgore an

opponent

without beingbitten, slashed,orgored in re-turn.

Once

weapons

areintroducedinto con-flict, natural controls are eliminated.

Sud-denly itisalltooeasytoinflictfatal injuries.

Among

hominids,fights

may

well have

be-came

fights tothedeathbefore there

were

any

socialcontrols inplace to preventthis

from

happening.

Equally problematic is the

human

mi-metic, or imitative, capacity alluded to

ear-lier. Thiscapacity, present in

many

species

buthighlydevelopedinthe

human,

makes

the

human

brain "a kind of

mimetic

machine," according to Girard."

Human

behavior is

learned

by

imitation,hewrites; itistheagent

notonly oflanguagebutofallcultural trans-mission. This

mimetic

propensity,

which

takes the place of

"programmed"

behavior,

probablydeveloped ina series of

evolution-a

ary steps, during

which

infancy

was

gradually

ex-tended,

allowing

for

greaterbraingrowth.

According

toGirard,

violenceprobably played

a crucialrole in this

pro-cess.

Mimesis

isan

effec-tivevehicle for

transmit-ting learned behaviors,

enabling

hominids

to

II

make

thebestuse oftheir

:| enlargedbrains. Ithasa

drawback, however,inthatittendsto

promote

rivalry

and

aggression

by

focusing

conta-giously

on

desire:

"A"

wants

what

"B"

has because itbelongs to"B."

The

story ofthe

forbiddentree inGenesis,Girard says,is re-allyaboutthisuniversal

human

predicament.

The

storybegins with

mimetic envy

and

etousness; itends withaccusations,

recrimi-nations,

and

expulsion.

The

combination

ofall these factors

—

volatility,

mimetic

rivalry, and use of

weap-ons

—

often

must

have led todisequilibrium.

Beforetheadvent ofculture,accordingtoGil

Bailie, one hominid's "acquisitive gesture"

couldeasily triggeramimetic chainreaction

among

the others:

By

itsverynaturemimeticdesireis

extremelyfickle.It

moves

from one

objecttoanotherasmodel-rivals

designatetheseobjects as desirable.

Mimeticdesires arecontagious,andas

they conlaminatethe social order,Ihcy

leadtorivalryandviolence.At each stageofthisdeepeningcrisis,the mimeticpassions

grow

more

volatile,

more

violent,and

more

responsive to

suggestion.

Allofthisbegins with an

acquisi-tivegesturetowardanobjectthai

awakensotherdesires forthatobject.

A

number

ofacquisitivegestures

made

towardthe

same

desiredobjectsetthe conllictin

motion.'-Among

primitive societies, the result

might be a catasfrophic crisis, a melee. But

justsuchviolentmimeticcrises

may

alsohave

provided the impetus for theiropposite, for

cultureandsocialorganization,as

communi-tiessought

ways

topreventfurtheroutbreaks.

The

scapegoat

mechanism

And

when

theywereout inthe field, Cainroseupagainst hisbrotherAbel andkilledhim.

(Gen4:8)

Mimesis

sets off thecrisis,

and

mimesis

haltsthecrisis. AccordingtoGirardiantheory,

it halts the crisis

by

channeling the

aggres-sionsofthe

group toward one

individual.

Atthesupreme

moment

ofviolent dis-integration,anothergestureis minieli-callyreplicatedwitheven

more

speed

andferocitythanthenumerous acquisitive gestureswithwhichthe crisisgotunder way. Atthe

moment

when

the socialfrenzyisatitsheight,

someone

designatesarivalwitha startlingaccusatoiy gesturethathas, underthecircumstances,an extremely

intensemimeticeffect.

The

melee becomesalynch

mob."

Whereas

theinitialacquishivegestureled to conflict,theaccusatorygesturehasthe

op-posite effect: It leads to social solidarity.

Bailie writes:

This istheturning point,onethatcan

beaccountedforpurelyintermsofthe

mimeticforcesthataremostlikelyto

havebeeninplayinproto-cultural situations.'"*

At

the height of the

mimetic

frenzy, the

singled-out individualis

murdered

bythe

mob.

"The

social free-for-all"turnsintoa

"commu-nal exorcism,"asthe crowd's

adrenaline-fu-eled fury isdisplacedontoitsvictim,'^andin

that

moment,

conflictistransfomiedinto

una-nimity.

The

retributivecycleishalted.

How

didit

happen?

Allparticipated;allareequally

mystified. Forthe

community,

the

sudden

resolutionofthemimeticcrisisonlyconfimis

thatthe victim

was

responsibleforit.

The

vic-tim

was

guiltyandis a savior.

The

victim is

promptly mythologized as agod, the

lynch-ing (and its beneficial effects)memorialized

inritual. Ina strangesequence ofevents, the furyofthe

mob

becomes

the basis fora

new

social order. Girard refers to this event, re-peated over and overin

human

communities

across the globe, as the"founding murder."

"Religion isorganizedaround a

more

or

less violent disavowal of violence,"Girard

writes."' Bailieexpressesthe

same

paradox,

callingarchaic religion"humanity's

astonish-ing instrument forturning

murder

and

mad-ness into a sacralized bulwark against

mur-der

and madness."

"

The

amalgam

ofreligious

awe

and

violence thatprimitive religion existsto

hallow

made

itpossible forarchaic

societiesto

endow

certain actsof

violence withreligious significanceand

therebytoputanendtothe relentless

reciprocity intowhichallviolence

otherwise tendstocollapse.'^

The

three

major components

ofprimitive

religion all serve this protective function.

Sacrifice ritually repeats the founding

mur-derand reclaims its beneficial effects.

The

original violence is unleashed, then spent;

thereafter

what

isaddressedin ritualis latent

be-comes

thereceptacleforthehostilities "allthe

members

of the

community

feel for one

an-other."''^

As

Bailiesaysbluntly,

"The

puipose

ofsacrificeistopreventwhat happens

when

it

fails."-" Thus,inthe Bible'sparadigmaticstory

of Cain and Abel, the brother

who

turns to

murder

is the one

whose

bloodless offering

leaves

him

withouta sacrificial outlet.

Laws

of prohibition regulate behaviors

as-sociated withmimeticconflict (like

covetous-ness and theft), or

en-forceorderlydistinctions (like hierarchy).

Such

distinctions areoftenlost

when

people are

imitat-ing

each

other,

con-sciously or

uncon-sciously.

Angry

rivals

quicklylose their

distinc-tiveness

and

become

"doubles,"

minor

images

of eachother.

Over

time,anylossof differen-tiation

may come

tobe associated withmimetic

discord, prompting groups to devise

complex

systems of mles concerning purityand

conta-gion

—

"arefusalof

mixed

statesthatlooks

upon

undifferentiation with horror."-' _Underneath

these seemingly pointless prohibitions, says

Girard,the threatofviolent conflictisveryreal.

Tlie third pillarofprimitivereligion,myth,

functionstoconcealandlegitimize sacred

vio-lencewhilepreserving the

memory

ofits

ben-eficialeffects.

The

myth

assures the

commu-nity thatthevictim

was

guiltyascharged(a lie),while honoring

him

orheras the savior

ofthe society.

Together, say Girardian thinkers, these

threeelements

become

theunderpinningsfor

all

human

culture. Mimesis,afterall, isonly

conflictual

when

it spreads.

When

concen-trated

on

a single victim, it has a pacifying

andregulating effect."

Becoming

like

God

And

the

Lord

said,

"What

haveyou done? Listen;yourbrother'sbloodis

crying outto

me

fromtheground!"

(Gen4.10)

Given

the

awe

surroundingthefounding

murder and

subsequentactsofsacralviolence.

it istobe expectedthatthose

who

tookpart

in these events

would

identify

them

with a

divine or supernatural

power

long after the

original event.

Communities

that follow a

system ofsacrificial rites

and

religious

pro-hibitions

do

so, not for the cathartic effect,

butinordertoplease or propitiate the

divin-ity to

whom

they

have

attributed that first

catastrophic violence.

And

it works, says

Girard. Observingreligious prohibitionsdoes

Throughout

his ministry,

Jesus

calls

on

his

followers

to

turn

the old

system

on

its

heady

to

break

Satan's

hold

on

human-kind

by

refusing

to

respond

to

violence

with violence

—

in

effect, to

begin

evolu-tion over,

this

time

with eyes

open.

decreasethe risk that the cycle of violence willbe renewed, bystrengthening thecultural

structure responsible forpreventingthat

vio-lence. Contrariwise, transgressing those

pro-hibitionscansetoff achainreactionthat feels

cataclysmic.

Is this the

image

of

God,

though, into

which

human

beings are evolving? Lsn't

something

wrong

here?

Human

nature is

fundamentally linked to

community.

One

cannot think about

what

it

means

to be in

God's image

without taking social

experi-ence

into account.

The

words

of

Genesis

even

suggestas

much:

"Letus

make

human-kindinour image, accordingtoourlikeness."

Whatever

referentof "us"

and

"our" is un-derstood.

Holy

Trinityor

heavenly

court,it

suggestsa

God

whose

very natureissocial, seeking fellowship.

Yet the heart ofthesocialexperiencefor

human

beings,Girardianthinkerssay,is

mur-der.

What

is to be

made

of this

paradox?

Perhaps,infact,itisnotsuchaparadox.

Per-hapsthissocial

dimension

ofthe

God-image

is evolving along with the species.

Scape-goating

came

about,afterall,to limitviolence,

at a time

when

human

beings

were

hardly

human

yet.

Once

scapegoating

was

duced, however, it quickly turned into the

defining reality

beyond which

it is difficult

orimpossible toperceivealternatives. This

insight is the reason

why, from

a religious

perspective, revelation is so crucial for

hu-man

moral

development.

Without

the

pro-phetic

word

that

comes

from

"outside" our

limited reality tochallenge andliberate,

hu-man

beings remain powerless to

change

de-structive patterns.

Jesus^

social

behavior

rejects

the false

determinism of

history

and

reveals the

potency of

human

freedom

in service

to

God,

even

in

the

midst

of

the

mob,

as

he

takes

upon

himself

the scapegoat^s

ancient

loneliness

and

dehumanization.

The

Hebrew

Bible is unique, according

toGirard,initschallengetoscapegoating. In

itisfoundthefirststripping

away

ofthe

myth

surrounding the victim

mechanism,

the first

unmasking

of the truth.

"What

have

you

done?"

God

says Cain,ina

theme

thatrecurs

throughoutthe

Hebrew

Bible, persistentlyif

notalwaysconsistently.

The

storyof

Abraham

andIsaachasanimalsacrificetaking the place

ofchild sacrifice aspart of

human

religious

evolution.

The Decalogue

sets strict limits

on mimetic

rivalry,

making

devotionto

God

thepathofpeace.

The

prophets attack the three

greatpillarsofprimitive religion

—

sacrifice,

mythology, and prohibition, "the primitive

conception ofthelawasa

form

of obsessive

differentiation"'^

—

demanding,

instead,

jus-tice for the powerless, the outsider, the

op-pressed. Indeed, according to Girard,

pro-phetic

Judaism and

Chiistianity are theonly

religionsinthehistoryoftheworldthat rest

on

a rejection offounding murder.-^

As

the

Bible unfolds, thecall totake the sideofthe

marginalized

becomes more

and

more

clear, likea

rumble

getting gradually louder.

With

the gospels,

says

Girard, the scapegoating

mechanism

is finally

defini-tively

unmasked,

thelie exposed.

The

truth

about violence is laid out

—

inJesus' life,in

hisdeath,andinhisvictoryoverdeath,

pro-claimed

by

the followers

who

had, not long

before, sidedwithhispersecutors. In effect,

God

hasintei'vened to

overcome

the

determin-ism ofevolution, inaugurating a

new human

being

not

bound by

the old

system

of

scapegoating,murder,

and

cover-up.

The

gospels'confrontationwithevilbegins

withthetemptationinthe desert,inwhichJesus

rejects the path of

vio-lentdomination,infavor

ofanactivereliance

on

God.

In so doing, he asserts hisfreedom from a

human

culturerooted

inviolence,

whose

orga-nizing principle he

de-nounces

as "Satan."-^

Throughout

his minis-try. Jesus calls

on

his

followersli)turn theoldsystem onitshead,to

breakSatan's hold

on

humankind

byrefusing

to respond toviolence with violence

—

in ef-fect,tobegin evolutionover,thistime witheyes

open. Itisperhapsfor thisreasonthatthe

way

ofthegospelisinvariablythe

way

ofparadox

andtheoverturningoftables.

To

liveinto

God

asJesus taughtisto livewith tensionsand

con-tradictions, to live as

new

human

beingsinan

oldand dyingculture.

This old culture is rooted in

self-decep-tion: inparticular,the beliefthatvictims are

deserving ofviolenceandthat

God

sideswith

thepersecutors. Girardsaysthat

when

Jesus

callsSatanthe "father oflies"(Jn 8:44),heis

challenginghisculture'sself-deception.''' In the

mechanism

ofthe founding murder,

Sa-tanrepresentsboththediabolos

—

the

sower

ofdivision, the seductive

power

ofmimetic

rivalry

from which

only

God

can free us

—

and satan,

Hebrew

for "accuser"

—

in other

words,thescapegoating tendencyofthe

mob.

The

stand Jesus takes is, thus, not

merely

against violence, but against that obsessive

differentiation that

makes harmonious

rela-tionsdependent

on

finger-pointing, exclusion,

andtheimpulsetogetridof whatever threat-ens. Initsplace,heoffersapeacethat"passes

human

understanding,"becauseit

comes

from

outsideiiumancultureinordertoconfrontthat

cuhure once and

forall.''

The

lifeandteachingofJesusis

why

the

New

Testament insists that

human

history, indeedcreationitself,begins over withChrist,

the

"second

Adam."

So, the prologue to John's gospel beginsthe storyoveratthe

be-ginning

—

thistime

from

thepointof

view

of

the invisible, unrecognized Logos, the

God

who

identifieswithvictims.-**

In thebeginning

was

theWord....

He

was

intheworld,andtheworld

came

intobeing through him;yet theworld

didnot

know

him.

(John 1:1, 10)

Whereas

theGenesis account has

God

expel-ling

Adam

and

Eve from

his presence,

John

tellsadifferent story:

He

came

towhat washisown, andhis

own

people didnot receivehim.

(John 1:11)

Jesus' social behavior rejects the false

determinism ofhistory

and

reveals the po-tency of

human

freedom

in service to

God,

even

inthemidstof the

mob,

ashetakes

upon

himselfthescapegoat's ancient loneliness

and

dehumanization.

Every

element ofthe

Pas-sion is

connected

to "every ritual

on

the

planet,"assertsGirard:

...thepreliminarytrial,thederisive crowd,thegrotesquehonorsaccorded

toihevictim, the particular roleplayed

bychance,...thedegradingpunishment

thattakesplace outside the holycity in

ordernottocontaminateit.-''

Thistime,however,theeffectisnottoshore

up

sacrificialviolence, butto

unmask

it.

Lib-erated

by

Jesus' resurrection,witnesses

pro-claimtoany

who

will listen thatthecrucified

man

was

innocent,like so

many

beforehim.

God's

self-appointedexecutioners(and

we

iU'e

all,to

vmying

degrees,implicated) are invited

toseethemselvesas

we

really are,not

instru-ments

ofdivinejusticebutscapegoaters

and

persecutorsoftheunprotected.

The

Crossintercedesinhistoryinthefomi

of devastating insight.

As

thegospel

procla-mationspreads, evolution'sgrimsecretis

de-claredopenly,demythologizing

and

exposing

our complicity in the persecutions thathave

beencarried out "since thefoundation of the

world"

(Mt

13:35). hifact,itisworking.

Over

the centuries, the

power

of thefounding

mur-der,

which depends on

delusion, has

been

steadily eroded by an awareness that cannot

be drivenout. Persecutionevokes automatic

suspicion,ineveryone:

Unable

tobelieve the

lies persecutors tell, others find themselves

siding withthe victims. This,says Girard, is

adirect resultof theCross

working

inhistory. Thiseye-openingactivityof

God

unfolds

slowly, almost invisibly, not

by

force but by

invitation and, as it were, by the persuasive

power

of discovery, hiotherwords, it takes

placeasallevolution does,whetherphysical,

historical,ormoral:bycreaturesgropinginthe

darkness, adjusting to

new

conditions,

com-ingtosuddendiscoveries,repeatingerrors,

liv-inginto

new

skillsand

new

ways

of knowing.

The

effects are still unfolding, in

ways

both

good and

terrible.

The

old system is

dying

—

not quietly but convulsively.

Large-scale slaughter

and even

genocide take the

place ofthe occasional efficacioussacrifice

associalgroupstrydesperately tocreate the

same

effectsofunanimity

and harmony.

This

is inevitable, says Girard, but the

outcome

is

by

no

means

assured.

The

human

speciescan

choose

the alternative, the

way

modeled by

Jesus

—

ortheycan destroy themselves. Itis

not clear

which

paththeywill take.

Conclusion: dwelling

in

and

breaking out

How

does the species live intothe

new

way

of

"human

being"

embodied

inChrist? I

end

this paper

where

I began, with the

in-sights of

Michael

Polanyi.

To

become

like

Christ,

one must

indwell Christ's life

and

teaching.

Religion,consideredasanactof

worship,isan indwellingratherthanan

affirmation. God...existsonlyinthe

sensethatheistobeworshipped and

obeyed,but nototherwise

—

any

more

thantruth, beauty,orjustice existas facts. All these,likeGod,arethings whichcan beapprehendedonlyin

servingthcm.^"

In this sense, Christian being is

Uke

all true

knowledge:

To

understanditatall,

one

must

"become

it."

One knows

by

incarnat-ing

—

theories,fact,language,culture,

moral-ity. Thatis

why

acceptance ofmoral

teach-ing is called "interiorization," Polanyi

re-marks.""

We

_imitate,

we

_{reheitrse;gradually}

we

are changed.

As

Drusilla Scott writes,

whatever

we

dwellin,outside ourselves,

be-comes

apartof ourthinking andknowing.'''

Applied to Christian disciples, this is

what

Paul calls"being inChrist." Girardcalls it

positivemimesis.

When

the

human

capacity

forimitationisappliedtoothers

on

the

same

levelasourselves,rivalry results.

When,

how-ever,itisdirectedtoward

someone

ata

much

higherlevel, such as Jesus or thesaints, the

resultisnotrivalrybutspiritualadvancement. This is

one

reasonthe

Church

plays such a

crucialrole intransformingculture.

Human

personsneedrolemodels!

Ifone focuses too

much

on

the

particu-lars,as

commonly

happens

withfaith

and

re-ligious practice,

one

loses touch with that

highertruth.^^

_The

_{task istoremain}

_open

_to

new

knowledge

—

yet nottooopen,lest itbe

overwhelming. Traditionand responsiveness to theSpirit are needed;

frameworks

for

as-similatingexperienceareneeded,andthe

flex-ibility to

adapt

them

when

experience

changes.""^

Polanyicalls this"dwellinginand breaking out."

Forms

and

traditions are

indwelt,inorderto

go

beyond

them

todeeper,

more

universalmeaning.

Above

all,itisnecessarytohavethe

free-dom

togropeafterthetruthof

God, and

tolet

othersgropeintheir

own

way. "People need

a

purpose

that bears

on

eternity."^'^

For

Polanyi,this

means

learningto livewithone's

moral shortcomings and those ofsociety

—

notrushingtoperfect,prohibit,orpunish, but

allowing

room

for

God

to

work

initall,and

lettingreligionbeitself,freeof materialism's

"absurd detemiinist viewpoint."'"'

_As

Paul wrotetotherecalcitrantCorinthians:

So

we

donot lose heart.

Even

though

our outernatureiswastingaway, our

inner nature isbeingrenewed day by day. Forthisslight

momentary

af-flictionispreparing usforaneternal

weight of glorybeyondallmeasure,

because

we

looknotatwhatcan be

seenbutatwhatcannot beseen. For

whatcan be seenistemporary,butwhat

cannot be seeniseternal.

(2

Cor

4:16-18)

Works

cited:

The

Bible.

New

Revised StandardVersion.

©

1989, Division ofChristian Education of

theNationalCouncil of

Churches

ofChrist

intheUnitedStatesofAmerica.

Bailie, Gil. Violence Unveiled:

Humanity

at the Crossroads.

New

York: Crossroad,

1995.

Girard,

Rene.

"The

Anthropology

of the

Cross." In

The

Girard Reader,ed.

by

James

G. Williams, 262-88.

New

York:

Cross-roads, 1996.

.

"The

Question of Anti-Semitism in the Gospels." In

The

Girard Reader, ed. by

James

G.Williains,211-21.

New

York: Crossroads, 1996.

. "Satan." In

The Girard

Reader, ed.

by James

G.Williams, 194-210.

New

York:

Crossroads, 1996.

. Things

Hidden

Sincethe

Foundation

ofthe World. Stanford: Stanford

Univer-sityPress, 1987.

. Violence

and

the Sacred. Trans.

PatrickGregory.Baltimore:Johns

Hopkins

University Press, 1977.

Polanyi,Michael. Personal

Knowledge.

Chi-cago: University of

Chicago

Press, 1958.

.

The

Tacit

Dimension.

Gloucester,

Mass.:PeterSmith, 1983.

Polkinghorne, John. Faith of a Physicist:

Reflections of

a Bottom-up

Thinker.

Min-neapolis: Fortress Press, 1996.

Scott, Drusilla.

Everyman

Revisited:

The

Common

Sense of

Michael

Polanyi.

Grand

Rapids, Mich.:

W.

B.

Eerdmans,

1985.

Endnotes:

1.Polanyi,Personal

Knowledge

,p. 383.

2. Polanyi,

The

TacitDimension,p. 33.

3. Ibid., p.45.

4. Polanyi,Personal

Knowledge,

p. 385.

5. Polanyi,

The

TacitDimension,p.48.

6. Ibid.,p.405. 7. Ibid.'p.4.

8.Polkinghorne,p. 15.

9.Girard,Things Hidden,p. 85.

10. Ibid.,p. 86.

11. Girard,

"The Anthropology

of the

Cross,"p.268. 12. Bailie,p. 121.

13. Ibid.,p. 122.

14.Ibid. 15.Ibid.

16.Girard,Things Hidden,p. 166.

17. Bailie, p. 16. 18. Ibid., p. 25.

19.Girard, Violence

and

theSacred,p.99.

20.Bailie,p. 139.

21. Girard,Things Hidden,p. 154.

22. Ibid., p.48. 23. Ibid.,p. 154.

24. Girard,

"The

Question of

Anti-Semit-ism"

p.218.

25. Girard,"Satan,"p.203.

26. Ibid., p.204.

27. Girard,Things Hidden,p. 203.

28. Ibid.,pp.274-75. 29.Ibid.,p. 167.

30. Polanyi,Personal

Knowledge,

p.279.

31. Polanyi,

The

TacitDimension,p. 17.

32. Scott,

Everyman

Revisited, 132.

33. Polanyi, op.cit.,p.33.

34.Scott,pp. 148, 151.

35. Polanyi, op.cit.,p. 92.

36. Ibid.

Kate

Layzer

is

an

M.Div.

student

at

Andover Newton

Theological

School.

Raised

by

committed

skeptics,

she

Is the first

member

of

her

family for

several generations

to

pursue a

religiousvocation.

Ms.

Layzer

grew

up

InCalifornia,

graduated

from Brandels

Universityin 1984,

and

worked

as a

copy

editor

before

entering

seminary

In 1996.

She

hopes

to

be

ordained

In

2003

to

pursue

parish

ministryinthe

United

Church

ofChrist.

<KLayzer@aol.

com>