Download The Meaning and Significance of the Concept of the Sacred in Religious Studies and more Study notes World Religions in PDF only on Docsity! Sacred-from Latin sacer. Originally, this Latin adjective had several uses, all of which held in common the idea of being set apart. Consecration, holiness, divine patronage, and inviolability are all meanings modern English speakers would recognize. There are two others that warrant specific mention. According to the Oxford Latin Dictionary, sacer could describe “one whose person and property are forfeited to a god by reason of an offense against a divine law” or be a term of abuse, meaning “execrable, detestable.” As previously stated, separation can be seen as an undercurrent to all usages of sacer, be it separation for holy or unholy reasons. Sacer went on to influence a number of modern languages, including French and English. In French-speaking areas, sacer was transformed into sacré, which can mean “sacred” or can be used as a profane exclamation. In the latter we can see the more objectionable definitions of sacer influencing modern language. Most English usages refer to consecration, sacredness to a divinity, or royal families due to the idea of divinely appointed monarchies. These meanings were in use and development prior to the nineteenth century. However, English also held briefly to meanings that many in the twenty-first century would render as “profane.” Now rare, sacred sometimes meant “accursed.” While more common in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, we see this use as late as the nineteenth century. Like in French, we can see the Latin idea of separation persisting through the modern connotation of holiness. Sacred became a mainstay of religious studies discussion through the work of functionalists. Most notably, French Sociologist Emile Durkheim paid great attention to the tension between what he saw as the sacred and the profane. This contrast formed a central piece of his definition of religion. In The Elementary Forms of Religious Life, a case study of Australian native tribes and key text on religious theory, Durkheim argues, “The division of the world into two domains, one containing all that is sacred and the other all that is profane—such is the distinctive trait of religious thought.” For many in the functionalist tradition, the word “sacred” is an adjective, describing what has been set apart religiously, be it in reference to trees sacred to a god, an amulet, or a temple. This idea is closely connected to the nineteenth century religious studies concept of taboo. For Durkheim, sacredness is meaning given to an object or person by humanity; there is no essence of sacredness and therefore human constructs must draw the line between sacred and profane. “Sacred things are those which are protected and isolated by prohibitions,” states Durkheim, “profane things are those to which the prohibitions apply, and they must keep their distance from sacred things.” In contrast, later scholars reinvented the academic term “sacred” as a noun. In doing so, they seem to draw on older meanings of the word and its Latin roots, for they focus on the idea of sacred things being wholly “other” from the world. This appears to have been first pioneered by R.H. Codrington, a nineteenth century missionary who considered that perhaps the explanation for experiences so out of the ordinary as found in religion lay in an encounter with some sacred reality. This idea was further advanced by Rudolf Otto, early twentieth century German theologian. In The Idea of the Holy, Otto called this sacred reality “the Holy” and argued that religious life centered on experiencing that which humbled and awed humanity, both attracting love and causing fear. The idea was then most thoroughly discussed by Mircea Eliade, a Romanian-born historian of religions who presented his theory in The Sacred and the Profane. For Eliade, the Sacred (notice the use of capitalization to emphasize overarching power) was that overwhelming essence experienced through a hierophany and felt in opposition to the mundane and profane world. On heirophanies, Eliade said, “In each case we are confronted by the same mysterious act—the manifestation of something of a wholly different order, a reality that does not belong to our world, in objects that are an integral part of our natural ‘profane’ world.” In
