Sacred

Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict: A History with Documents

Charles D. Smith

Sacred.  Most of my morning I invested reading a history book on the Arab-Israeli conflict and there is so much of that conflict that is derived from the notion of sacred space. One could almost wish that two Holy lands could be stacked on top of one another in this part of the world. In my religion courses, we talk about how certain spaces are made sacred (or declared sacred). They are set apart as “different” spaces – spaces in which connection with divine power is either guaranteed or more likely. All religions have these sacred spaces. Interestingly, they also develop notions of sacred times, either of the week, year, or even generations and eons. There are also sacred books – books that are different than other books – books likely to bring one into more immediate contact with God or the gods. There are also sacred rituals, sacred people, sacred objects, sacred words and phrases, sacred elements, and sacred songs among other things.

In Western religions, these sacred “things” have sometimes been regulated and even “owned” by religious institutions. People must pay to enter sacred space or to avail themselves of access to sacred people or to see sacred objects. People “claim” them and then determine who may and may not have access to them. And because they are sacred and thus vital – or determined so – people will even fight over them and indeed, kill for them. We call these sacred wars. Wars that are supposedly “different” than other wars because they are, it is believed, ordained by God when they are fought.

In the Light of Reverence

Tonight I watched a thought provoking documentary on three sacred spaces in Native American religion that are presently being threatened by non-sacred or semi-sacred uses, In the Light of Reverence. Both sides of the debate are given an opportunity to speak though the proponents of the “non-sacred” don’t come off looking terribly “enlightened”.  The documentary raises an interesting question: When two or more groups differ with respect to the use of a single space, should the side that declares that their use is “sacred” always win? What if two different groups declare the same space sacred? How is it possible that one group can see a spot as so crucial to making contact with God while the other just sees a pile of gravel to be bulldozed for asphalt? Would any of us have seen Moses’ bush burning?Is there any chance that this could be a sacred blog and none of us know it?

And why do we declare one spot sacred and not another? One person sacred and not another? One book sacred and not another? One time sacred and not another? Some food sacred and not others? Some actions sacred and not others? Is it because we would be overwhelmed if we were taught to see sacred in everything? Would it be too confusing? There are some who would say that nothing is more or less sacred than anything else because it is all just … dirt and atoms and quarks anyway. Not like anything is more special than anything else?

Excellent movie for provoking a discussion about all these questions. Highly recommended.

Questions for Comment: What about you? What in your house would come closest to being a “relic”? What place in your neighborhood would serve best as an “alter”? Which book brings you into the presence of God? Who do you spend time with and come away feeling spiritually energized by? What moment in your day, week, month, year, or life has been your most sacred? What is a ritual that brings you into the presence of something or someone greater than you?