
So What?
“I have a nagging hunch that the
gospel’s power in our own time is about to be manifested in a manner
as repugnant to the sensibilities of the society at large, and all of us who
have accommodated ourselves to it, as the early Christian message was to Roman
paganism. Our society is possessed, Christians as much as anyone. We are possessed
by violence, possessed by sex, possessed by money, possessed by drugs. We
need to recover forms of collective exorcism as effective as was the early
Christian baptism’s renunciation of ‘the devil and all his works.’”
(Walter Wink, Engaging the Powers)
It is not too much to say that in the
gospel of Jesus Christ, we all have our own mimetic demons called out of us.
Until we acknowledge our own ‘possession’ by mimesis and our own
need to constantly challenge our own negative mimetic tendencies and resolve
them in a non-violent fashion, with no scapegoats, we will not be a healing
church.
As followers of Jesus, we have the opportunity,
even the obligation to continue Jesus’ ministry of freeing the possessed
(including ourselves!). The “insanity” (Michael Foucault) of western
culture possesses most of us to one extent or another, as reflected in the
myriad of addictive behaviors and aggressive outbursts we see around us. The
recognition of Satan as one who afflicts all of us helps us with two things.
First, it keeps us from identifying the sisters and brothers around us with
their affliction, and second, it keeps us from scapegoating the victims of
Satan. We need look no farther than ourselves to find the next victim.
2006:
First, I would recall The Passion of
the Christ by Mel Gibson. I thought this was as fine an exploration as one
would see on the relationship between Jesus, Satan and the question of violence.
Every single temptation is oriented to get Jesus to choose violence, judgment,
justice. Even Mary is tested to see if she could manipulate Jesus. Virtually
every flashback was oriented to Jesus’ teaching on non-violence and
love. It is exactly nonviolence and love that is being tested.
Second, I would also want to observe
that folks with a Newtonian worldview are the ones who have trouble with the
so-called supernatural; those of us with a quantum theology have no such trouble.
A lot of moderns need to take their heads out of the sand of ‘the absolute’
of philosophy and physics. Become postmodern already for crying out loud.
The satanic while immanent to humans, and experienced as such, is also perceived
as transcendent, that is, more than human, and so it can be said. God created
the heavens and the earth and all that dwells therein, humanity, human beings,
created the satan, the psycho-social-spiritual power that rules us.
Third, in assuming our humanity, Jesus
also confronts ‘our’ Satan, this is why the temptation narratives
are important. Jesus experienced the reality of this personified violent mimesis,
but did not acquiesce or listen to that voice. Jesus does not engage in the
use of force to achieve his goals and commands his followers to do the same.
In so doing, we resist the Satan and break down the satanic energizing of
sinful structures.
Anthropological Reading
The element of the demonic in the gospel
text disconcerts some readers. Many prefer to see the demonic as an expression
of physical or mental illness; e.g., it was some form of epilepsy or schizophrenia.
Others choose a more literalist rendering and see evil spirits everywhere.
Most people are just plain mystified. “The cultural chasm between the
1st and 20th centuries yawns especially wide when we touch on the question
of exorcism” (Meier, A Marginal Jew, Volume 2).
Today’s gospel text immediately
places us in a world that is foreign to us. In order to understand Jesus power
over the demonic we must first understand the power of the demonic over the
human. To do this we turn to mimetic theory and its explanation of the power
generated by the scapegoat mechanism through the process of sacralization.
According to Mimetic Theory, we sacralize
our victims when we create a lie to justify our violence; this lie is the
determination of guilt we attribute to the victim. In addition we also attribute
to the victim the end result of our social violence which oddly enough is
social cohesion or peace. Our unity against a common victim is the violent
ground upon which we as humans can build entire worlds, complete with competing
deities of good and evil.
The gospels do not sacralize Jesus, they
do not make him sacred in the way myths make sacred their victims. His life
story is told so that it can be clearly seen that he was not guilty of the
judgment he was given. His innocence is vindicated in his resurrection. His
life, death and resurrection expose and disempower, once and for all, that
God has nothing to do with violence, that violence is a purely human phenomenon.
And when violence is desacralized down comes the house of cards built by the
deceptions and lies of the Powers. Satan is stripped of the divinity with
which we have clothed him. He has fallen like lightning to the earth. He is
of human origin, but has superceded humanity and twisted humanity in his grip.
And what does he do? He lies and murders, from the beginning.
The Satan, this heavenly prosecutor,
is for us, both big and bad and scary as well as defeated and transformed.
We know that Jesus overcame the Powers of darkness in his cross and resurrection
but most of us frankly don’t want to get near others who even approximate
someone who acts demon possessed. Visions of ‘The Exorcist’ fly
around our minds.
The Satan is a vision of horror and terror.
The Satan is our Frankenstein, the monster created in us and by us and we
are “all of our father, the devil.” Perceiving the Satan as an
anthropological category does not diminish evil, rather it demands we examine
all of the blood on our own hands, it thus personalizes evil. Some may think,
“well, if you anthropologize Satan, then you depersonalize him and make
less of evil than it really is.” The opposite is the case. When mimetic
desire is exposed it is seen for all of its emptiness and darkness. It reeks
of the smell of death and lies. And it reveals to us the many times and ways
we have indeed been the Satan to each other. Who amongst us can lift up guiltless
hands?
Further, the great theodicy questions
are actually not all that great when Satan is demystified, when he is cast
from heaven to earth. The question is no longer “why does God allow
suffering?” but becomes “why do we cause each other to suffer?”
It places the sin where it belongs, on the sinner, not on some sentient being
outside of us. There are many benefits to the demystification of Satan. An
excellent example of hundreds of implications of this demystification can
be found in Walter Wink’s trilogy on the Powers, especially the third
volume Engaging the Powers.
Jesus’ encounter with Satan actually
means something in human history. It is his encounter with the dark side of
humanity, of our choice to have knowledge of both ‘good and evil.’
Jesus is able to free others from the mimetic darkness and bondage to ‘evil
spirits’ because he has in himself already overcome them (the temptation
narrative).
What then of demonic possession? Demonic
possession can be described as what occurs when one is completely overwhelmed
with the demands and prohibitions one encounters in any culture. The internal
mimesis, the desire for differentiation, becomes so acute that the “I”
is completely sublimated to imitation of all other “I’s.”
The person ceases to exist, they are purely in imitation of all others. When
Jesus heals the demoniac, the person is often said to ‘be in their right
mind.’ That is, Jesus loosens the bond between the powers of darkness
and our sense of self and liberates us from our self-destructive tendencies.
Demonic (mimetic) possession is very
real, very terrifying and often very deadly. We do not minimize the affliction
of the demoniac nor the wondrous power of Jesus when we anthropologize the
Satan. Instead we can take ownership of the Satan, acknowledge his conquest
over us and gives thanks for Jesus’ conquest over the reign of death
and darkness.
A Bibliographical Note
Much has been written on the devil. Girard’s theory does not depend
on any of the variations by which the devil is known. Mimetic theory can account
for them all. However, the majority of Christians around the world have extremely
superstitious views of evil and the devil. Most of what people believe comes
from a combination of medieval Christianity and modern Hollywood.
I have benefited from the four books
written by Jeffrey Burton Russell, The Devil , Satan , Lucifer and Mephistopheles
.
Girard’s observations on the Satan
can be found in Things Hidden, Job and The Scapegoat. The Satan as ‘skandalon’,
while central to mimetic theory, will be discussed in another place at a future
date. Our concern today is the larger question of removing Satan from the
locus of theology and placing him squarely in anthropology.
Historical Cultural
From a historical perspective, it has
been difficult for scholars to understand the place of exorcism in Jesus ministry.
The vast majority of the educated prefer to think in terms of modern medicine.
And they are quite right to do so. Health specialists have long been aware
of the connection between a healthy psychology and a healthy body. We cannot
agree with the judgment of Theissen and Merz (The Historical Jesus) that “we
do not have an exorcism if a disease is attributed to a demonic cause (e.g.,
the bent back of the woman in Luke 13:10-17). The mind/body and mind/brain
discussions of the last fifty years have shown that we are what we think as
much as what we eat. On the other hand, to reduce Jesus’ exorcisms to
healing narratives misses the larger point of the downfall of the mimetic
powers in Jesus’ ministry. “Perhaps in no other aspect of Jesus’
ministry does his distance from modern Western culture and scientific technology
loom so large and the facile program of making the historical Jesus instantly
relevant to present day men and women seem so ill-conceived” (A Marginal
Jew).
As we have seen in the Anthropological
Reading, it is neither facile nor ill-conceived to try and understand Jesus’
exorcisms. It is only difficult to conceive of exorcism because most of us
do not perform them on a regular basis. For most, the realm of the demonic
is the realm of the unknown. This is because we are blinded to the ways in
which we all have been brought into bondage by mimesis. We cannot liberate
others when we are not free ourselves. We cannot help the dysfunctional regain
their ‘sanity’ when we do not live congruent lives but continue
to entrap others with our own double binds as well as be entrapped by the
double binds of others.
The congruency between Jesus’
actions and teachings has been the subject of many modern studies on the Kingdom
of God. We have learned that we cannot separate Jesus’ table fellowship
or his healings or his exorcisms from his teaching on the reign of God in
love, peace and forgiveness. So intimately connected are they that after World
War II some scholars could refer to Jesus sayings as ‘speech-events’
(Gerhard Ebeling and Ernst Fuchs), words that accomplish what they say. The
converse is also true: Jesus’ actions are those that liberate with healing
words. G.R. Beasley-Murray has well said “the believers experience of
grace is determined by the totality of Jesus’ actions as the Son of
Man” (Jesus and The Kingdom Of God).
Monika Hellwig points out the value of
this line of thought: “Whether or not particular stories of encounters,
miracles, conversations or sermons, are chronicles of actual events or constructs
giving a broader interpretation of the meaning and impact of Jesus, the testimonies
of the gospels and the life-style of those who subsequently lived as his followers,
give eloquent witness to these as the characteristics that people most clearly
saw and most eagerly admired in Jesus. But all of these characteristics also
speak very clearly of a life lived as though God reigned and none else had
power” (Jesus: The Compassion of God).
Marcus Borg offers a helpful analysis
that has suggestive implications for a mimetic theoretical approach to these
narratives. Speaking of Jesus as Exorcist, Borg says, “Cross-cultural
studies of the phenomenon indicate a number of typical traits. ‘Possession’
occurs when a person falls under the control of an evil spirit or spirits.
Such people are inhabited by a presence which they (and others) experience
as ‘other than themselves.’ In addition to having two or more
‘personalities,’ they exhibit bizarre behavior and are often destructive
or self-destructive.” “Exorcism is the expulsion of the evil spirit,
driving it out of the person and ending its ownership.” (Marcus Borg,
Jesus: A New Vision, New York: Harper & Row, 1987) In mimetic theory it
is possible to recognize that each of us imitates multiple rivals, so Borg’s
observations on the consequences of such undefined multiplicity of desires
rings true.
Jesus’ identity and the Exorcism.
Looking at this passage again, there
is one last thing worthy of note. Mark’s gospel is primarily concerned
with two conflicting christologies, the Davidic warrior king of the apocalyptic
movement (which the crowds believe John to be preaching) and the crucified
Son of Man that Jesus turns out to be. This exorcism is described as a “teaching,”
a rather strange thing. “They were all amazed, and they kept on asking
one another, “What is this? A new teaching—with authority! He
commands even the unclean spirits, and they obey him.” (Mark 1:27) His
exorcism is a teaching, one about his identity. (This is another similarity
between Mark and John, the way that Jesus’ miracles, or signs, are first
and foremost signs that point toward his identity.)
If this is then a sign or teaching about
his identity, then his very essence (at least for Mark) involves the freeing
of the victim from the madness of the mimetic system. And that thought leads
us directly to “So What?”
Either this page has not yet been completed, or we have not found any significant textual issues in the lectionary texts for this Sunday.
Introductory Articles
We will add articles as we are able,
or as users of the site request them, so if you have suggestions for additional
pieces, please write to us!
"Introduction
to Mimetic Theory"
"Mimesis"
"The
Scapegoat"
"The
Pillars of Culture"
"Jesus"
"The
Four Gospels"
A Brief Introduction
to Luke
What's New: (Hover your mouse over to pause cycling)
Dt 18:15-20
Ps 111
1 Cor 8:1-13
Mk 1:21-28
(Deuteronomy 18:15-20)
The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your
own people; you shall heed such a prophet. This is what you requested of the
LORD your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly when you said: "If
I hear the voice of the LORD my God any more, or ever again see this great
fire, I will die." Then the LORD replied to me: "They are right
in what they have said. I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among
their own people; I will put my words in the mouth of the prophet, who shall
speak to them everything that I command. Anyone who does not heed the words
that the prophet shall speak in my name, I myself will hold accountable. But
any prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, or who presumes to speak
in my name a word that I have not commanded the prophet to speak--that prophet
shall die."
(1 Corinthians 8:1-13)
Now concerning food sacrificed to idols: we know that "all of us possess
knowledge." Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up. Anyone who claims
to know something does not yet have the necessary knowledge; but anyone who
loves God is known by him. Hence, as to the eating of food offered to idols,
we know that "no idol in the world really exists," and that "there
is no God but one." Indeed, even though there may be so-called gods in
heaven or on earth--as in fact there are many gods and many lords-- yet for
us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we
exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through
whom we exist. It is not everyone, however, who has this knowledge. Since
some have become so accustomed to idols until now, they still think of the
food they eat as food offered to an idol; and their conscience, being weak,
is defiled. "Food will not bring us close to God." We are no worse
off if we do not eat, and no better off if we do. But take care that this
liberty of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak. For
if others see you, who possess knowledge, eating in the temple of an idol,
might they not, since their conscience is weak, be encouraged to the point
of eating food sacrificed to idols? So by your knowledge those weak believers
for whom Christ died are destroyed. But when you thus sin against members
of your family, and wound their conscience when it is weak, you sin against
Christ. Therefore, if food is a cause of their falling, I will never eat meat,
so that I may not cause one of them to fall.
(Mark 1:21-28)
They went to Capernaum; and when the sabbath came, he entered the synagogue
and taught. They were astounded at his teaching, for he taught them as one
having authority, and not as the scribes. Just then there was in their synagogue
a man with an unclean spirit, and he cried out, "What have you to do
with us, Jesus ofNazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are,
the Holy One of God." But Jesus rebuked him, saying, "Be silent,
and come out of him!" And the unclean spirit, convulsing him and crying
with a loud voice, came out of him. They were all amazed, and they kept on
asking one another, "What is this? A new teaching--with authority! He
commands even the unclean spirits, and they obey him." At once his fame
began to spread throughout the surrounding region of Galilee.
New Revised Standard Version Bible, copyright 1989, Division of Christian
Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United
States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
Occasional Articles
As with the Introductory Articles, we
will add other articles as time permits or as our readers request. If you
have a suggestion for anything, please let us know.
Michael Hardin
Is the Apocalypse Inevitable?: Native American Prophecy and the Mimetic Theory presented to the Colloquium on Violence and Religion 2008
Michael's Essay for a Celebration Volume honoring Rene Girard
Michael's Response to Willard Swartley's Covenent of Peace at the November Colloquium and Violence Meeting
Does
Peace Make A Difference? - Michael's essay in response to Rick
Warren's P.E.A.C.E. plan (which somehow never mentions peace).
An Analysis of Rick Warren - Michael's response to "The Purpose Driven Life."
"The
God of Pat Robertson" - a response to Pat Robertson's words
to the people of Dover, PA.
"A
response to Charles Stanley's "A Nation at War"
"Must
God be violent? A Diagnosis and Prescription for Modern Christianity"
The
Scapegoat: Christologies in Conflict - A Study in Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Biblical
Testaments as a Marriage of Convenience: Rene Girard and Biblical Interpretation
Finding
Our Way Home: A Brief Note On The Authority and Interpretation of Scripture
"Does
The Passion of the Christ Preach the Gospel?"
A
sermon for the holiday devoted to Dr. Martin Luther King. (requires
Adobe Acrobat Reader.)
GRASPING
GOD: Philippians 2: 1-11 in the Light of Mimetic Theory
Rene Girard and the Recovery of Early Christian Perspectives (Brethren Life and Thought)
The Dynamics of Violence and the Imitation of Christ in Maximus Confessor (St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly)
"EcoSpirituality"
Or What Happens When You Sit Down With A French Literary Critic
Jeff Krantz
Mighty
One or Crucified Messiah? Competing Christologies and the Chiastic
Structure of Mark's Gospel
There's
No Such Thing as the Rapture - A sermon preached at the Church
of the Advent, Westbury (requires Acrobat Reader)
Holy
Scripture and the Consecration of Gene Robinson - a response
to the request of the Windsor Report for a Scriptural rationale. (requires
Adobe's Acrobat Reader)
Worship - The Redemption of Desire by Jeff Krantz
Myth
and Film - a piece written for the City of Angels Film Festival
The Stations of the Cross - Rewritten by Jeff Krantz
A Dramatic Presentation of the Stations of the Cross for Youth by Barb Fabijan-Waddell
Escaping
the Power of "My" - A NonViolent Approach to Stewardship
Preaching
Peace in Hollywood: The Theologies of Terminator, Lord of the Rings, and the
Matrix
V
for Vendetta - The Name Says It All A review of the movie.
Essays, Sermons and Liturgical Pieces by Friends of Preaching Peace
"Jesus and the Gibeonites: Reading the Bible from the Perspective of the Hidden Victim" by James Warren.
Mark Heim's "No More of This" - A hymn on Nonviolent Atonement
Kate Layzer's "No More of This" - A hymn on Nonviolent Atonement (and inspiration for Mark Heim's hymn!)
Alan Cork, "Transformation" in L'Arche: A Mimetic Account presented to the Colloquium on Violence and Religion 2008
"The Wisdom of God's Peace" a sermon by Jim Amstutz, co-pastor of Michael's church.
Girard's Christology - Per Bjornar Grande
Violence, Anarchy and Scripture: Jacques Ellul and Rene Girard - Matthew Patillo
Comparing
Plato's Understanding of Mimesis to Girard's - Per Bjorner Grande
C. Frank Terhune, an Easter Sermon: "God's Big But" (no kidding!)
Gerald Biesecker-Mast's paper from Theologia Pacis on Pacifist Gospel Epstimology.
An essay by the Rev. John Hill on Mimetic Theory and Catechesis