Who is your Good Friday scapegoat?

I went to a Good Friday gathering for the first time in over 20 years, and it made me feel uneasy. When I was younger, I turned my back on the Catholic religion that was a part of my upbringing and opted instead to become agnostic, which was popular at the time.

Lately, I've become disenchanted with the contemporary non-religious perspective and have recommenced going to Mass. However, I still have some doubts regarding Christianity, and I don't believe that I fit in with this congregation on this particular day. The Catholic church and various other denominations observe this sacred occasion by performing the Stations of the Cross and the Passion Play, which are both dramatizations depicting the brutal circumstances that led to Jesus Christ's death on the cross.

The Passion Play caught my attention. I had overlooked how the audience is involved in the performance. At certain points, we were prompted to act as the violent crowd, yelling "Crucify him! Crucify him!" I found it odd and emotionally distressing. Christianity requires us to envision that the son of God was cruelly slain by a savage group, while Peter, one of his apostles, hid in fear. Afterwards, we are urged to relate not to the suffering Christ, but to the merciless mob that celebrates his demise.

If you were an eccentric researcher trying to create a global religion in a laboratory with the hope of it being popular among people, it's doubtful that you'd devise it in this manner. What purpose does this peculiar narrative serve?

While exploring for a solution, I turned to René Girard, a French intellectual who lived in Stanford's French Department for 15 years, most likely because they were unsure of where else to place him. Girard's claim to fame is his concept of "mimetic desire," which suggests that individuals develop certain wants due to observing others attain them. This notion is quite profound, and Girard employs it to construct a thought-provoking hypothesis on culture and aggression. However, it was an additional element of his views that piqued my curiosity.

Girard went against the popular belief of agnostic Jungianism that was prevalent in the humanities during his time. Many people at that time were focused on finding the commonalities between various cultures around the world. People like Joseph Campbell believed that myths from various cultures all connected to the same archetypes, forming one big "monomyth" that influenced everyone. This notion was used by George Lucas as he created the Star Wars mythology which has been embraced globally over the past four decades. It was an ideal belief system for an era that emphasized cultural sensitivity and inclusivity.

Girard disagrees with the notion that all myths are identical. According to him, ancient or primitive religions use myths to justify violent acts that establish their social order. He further claims that every human culture and government has been established on violence. Only Judaism and Christianity expose this violence as unrighteous and erroneous. Therefore, Girard believes that the Judeo-Christian worldview is fundamentally distinctive and even disruptive. It is a revolution that breaks away from the past.

This notion is evident in the book of Genesis. According to Girard's interpretation, the tale of Cain and Abel illustrates the killing of an unsullied victim as the commencement of human society. Following the ruthless murder of his brother, Cain proceeds to establish a city. This is the earliest manifestation of "scapegoating", where we pinpoint and ultimately remove or execute an individual victim, solidifying the connections that unite us as a group.

The story showcases Girard's idea of "mimetic desire". It is basically Cain's need for God's approval- something that he shares with his brother Abel- that triggers his envy and fury when he is unable to get it. Girard has analyzed these scenarios throughout the Hebrew Bible in the tales of Jacob and Esau, Adam and Eve, the Suffering Servant, and the Hebrew prophets. In fact, the execution of Jesus mirrors Abel's murder- albeit in this circumstance, the church states that we are all collectively responsible for Jesus' death.

I have reached the conclusion that one should never ignore the potential for bad behavior in an individual.

When I was younger, I didn't believe in Original Sin. I didn't understand why some people believed that I had evil inside of me. I thought I was a good person. But now that I'm older, I realize that everyone has the potential to be evil, even me, so it's important to be aware of it.

Girard's explanation of the concept of Original Sin is quite convoluted. Merely by being a part of the human society and playing an active role in it, we indirectly support the foundational violence on which the culture or society has been built. Judaism and Christianity strive to unravel the scapegoating mechanism by proving the blameless nature of the victim. However, this doesn't mean that the associated risks are eliminated entirely.

Girard acknowledges that even though the stories of Jews and Christians may seem rebellious, they are still capable of resorting to scapegoating. Furthermore, their stories also expose the guilt of the crowd and the innocence of the victim, which weakens the once effective safeguard for public order. In current times, the ideals of Judaism and Christianity have been used to break down social bonds including their own. These long-standing myths and customs have been disregarded as prejudiced, superstitious, and judgmental. However, according to Girard, these traditions helped us control our most murderous tendencies. But in their absence, can we prevent these tendencies from taking over?

Even though Girard passed away in 1995, I believe he wouldn't be shocked by how harsh today's political environment has become. The Right and Left sides of the political spectrum are both attempting to depict the opposing group as evil and to get rid of people who challenge their beliefs and ideology. Girard had even prophesied the rise of "super-Christianity," which encompasses all aspects of oppression and victimization. Girard had warned that it would probably emerge as the new form of totalitarianism in the future, surpassing the primitive version of Marxism. This prediction was conveyed by him to Canadian journalist David Cayley.

As members of a society strongly influenced by Christianity, we should be particularly alarmed by the recent increase in antisemitism. This type of discrimination can signal a dangerous period of unjustly blaming and victimizing a specific group. It's easy for Christians (or even those who have moved away from the faith) to fall into the trap of blaming Jewish individuals for the death of Christ, while absolving ourselves of any responsibility.

I am intrigued by Girard's ideas, but to be honest, they don't provide me with much solace or protection. There are hidden powers in our world that we struggle to comprehend. Girard's theories only exacerbate my fear of the suffering that Christ endured. The act of chanting "Crucify him!" within the confines of a church surrounded by fellow followers amplifies my culpability in humanity's transgressions.