Seán O’Conaill: If the Creed is Forgotten …?

If the Christian Creed is forgotten, the scapegoat mechanism will return.

This is the essence of René Girard’s warnings in defence of the Christian Creed – in support of Pope Benedict XVI’s campaign against philosophical relativism, from 2005.

To explain what Girard meant we need to observe a cyclical pattern of human behaviour that repeats and repeats down the ages, in the following sequence:

(1) Crisis > (2) Accusation > (3) Unanimity Against the Accused > (4) Violent Elimination or Expulsion of the Accused > (5) Temporary Peace  

With a doctorate in medieval history Girard observed this pattern archetypally in anti-Jewish pogroms – especially following the onset of the Black Death in Europe in the mid-1340s. 

The 20^th century Holocaust of Jews in Europe – in the wake of the intense German crisis of 1918-33 – followed that same pattern. So did the lynchings of thousands of African Americans in the decades following the defeat of the slave-owning Confederacy in the US Civil War of 1861-65.

To explain why the peace initially achieved by scapegoating will gradually erode Girard argued that we never bring to complete awareness the fact that our desires are typically copied subliminally from those we see as somehow superior. We will then inevitably enter into rivalry and potential conflict – over what cannot be shared. This conflictual ‘mimetic’ desire – known to the Bible as covetousness – is always the source of the next gathering crisis, and of the cycle of scapegoating that will then repeat – unless we come fully awake.

For Girard the Christian Gospels are unique in revealing both the innocence of the scapegoat and the guilt of ‘the Accuser’ – the source of all unjust accusation. 

That is what the name ‘Satan’ originally meant – ‘the Accuser’. For Girard that name identifies the observable historical pattern of crowds uniting to victimise someone, in response to an accusatory lie.

The Christian Creed is a compressed summary of the Gospel, and, for Girard, the only true ‘Great Story’ – because it declares the true innocence of the one accused.

‘Relativism’ – the belief that there is no objective truth, only subjective belief – grew out of the blindness that befell Christianity when it became allied with the state, from c. 312 AD. This led the Christian church itself to become a scapegoating and victimising force – via e.g. the medieval Inquisitions for the prosecution of heresy – beliefs that seemed to diverge from official truth.

‘Secularism’ is essentially a reaction against state-supported Christian belief, arguing that religious fervour and Creedal conviction, allied with state power, become necessarily oppressive.

For Girard the Catholic Church’s espousal of religious freedom – at the end of Vatican II in 1965 – marked the end of the church’s mistaken association with religious oppression. The separation of church and state is necessary to protect the Gospel – because no one is free to accept the Creed unless they are also free to reject it.

Now, following eight decades of relative abhorrence of conflict after the Second World War of 1939-1945 – and special abhorrence of anti-Semitism – is the spirit of accusation and scapegoating returning – as the world faces a combined climatic, economic and political crisis?  

What exactly lies behind grotesque lies against immigrant minorities, such as ‘they are eating the dogs’? 

As Ireland too becomes internationally enmeshed and dependent on forces that lie outside its own control, could the ongoing excitation of resentment against immigrants precipitate more, and even greater, scapegoating tragedies? Do we now need the Creed not only to interpret ongoing events but to save us from the disgrace of unjust victimisations – beginning with false narratives of internal enemies who must be expelled?

Why do we Irish Catholics recite the Creed every Sunday, and renounce Satan every Easter – but rarely take time to discuss why we do that? 

Do we now need to come fully awake to the meaning of what we are doing?