Hermeneutics of Sacrifice: Wrestling with the Death of Christ in a Feminist and Ecological World

Trying to make sense of the brutal crucifixion of Jesus Christ has been one of the more controversial tasks of soteriological discourse in Christianity. While always understood within the light of the resurrection, scripture abounds with multiple metaphors that have attempted to ascribe salvific meaning to the cross. From a Catholic standpoint, sacrifice, and in particular, a “sacrifice for sins” has remained central to both theological and liturgical reflections on the death of Jesus. While the language of sacrifice pervades Catholic liturgy and has been used throughout the Christian tradition to describe the salvific meaning of the cross, its use has been particularly challenging in light of contemporary critiques that have emerged from the fields of feminist, womanist, and eco-theologies. Many theologians operating within these fields view the language of sacrifice as damaging for those on the very margins of society, for it continues to perpetuate violence and abuse. Some feminist and womanist theologians find it deeply problematic to claim that Jesus’ death was anything other than a brutal crucifixion, disclosing the reality of a violent world plagued by patriarchal power structures. For many eco-theologians, there has been an over-emphasis on the cross as a “sacrifice for sins,” which confines soteriological discourse to the human realm.

In this dissertation, I argue that the scriptural language of “sacrifice for sins” can be re-claimed through the lens of cultural anthropologist, Rene Girard, to describe the salvific meaning of the cross for both women and the wider ecological world. To do this, I first present and critically engage the various criticisms offered by feminist, womanist, and eco-theologians for why the language of sacrifice should be dismissed. While these reasons differ, I argue that there is in each of them a false assumption about how sacrifice has been understood in the Christian tradition. In order to argue for this, I offer my own reading of four central figures from the past that are oftentimes critiqued for putting forward an understanding of the cross as a sacrifice that is deeply problematic for women and the non-human world: Paul, Augustine of Hippo, Anselm of Canterbury, and finally, Martin Luther. Here, I argue that a Lutheran understanding of sacrifice is a deviation from the past three theologians and is responsible for putting forward a soteriology that has rightfully been critiqued by contemporary theologians. While Paul, Augustine, and Anselm offer more nuanced understandings of the cross as a sacrifice for sin, I argue that there is a need for a contemporary hermeneutical apparatus within which to place the language of sacrifice. This will allow for sacrifice to be fully re-claimed and for it to speak directly to the victims of violence today. I finally argue that Rene Girard’s developed understanding of sacrifice offers both feminist and eco-theologies, concerned with liberation a soteriology that addresses the conversion of those who are complicit in systematic injustice, thus offering an account of how forgiveness, healing, and ultimately, transformation of injustice occurs through the Christ-event.