The_Sacred

Religious Research Association, Inc.

The Sacred: Differentiating, Clarifying and Extending Concepts Author(s): Matthew T. Evans Reviewed work(s): Source: Review of Religious Research, Vol. 45, No. 1 (Sep., 2003), pp. 32-47 Published by: Religious Research Association, Inc. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3512498 . Accessed: 18/04/2012 12:21 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Religious Research Association, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Review of Religious Research.

http://www.jstor.org

THE SACRED: DIFFERENTIATING, CLARIFYING AND EXTENDING CONCEPTS MATTHEWT. EVANS BRIGHAMYOUNGUNIVERSITY REVIEWOF RELIGIOUSRESEARCH,2003, VOLUME45:1, PAGES32-47

Disparate uses of the term "sacred"are illustrated,and threecategories of meaning are suggested: religious, transcendent,and set apart. The latter concept is differentiatedfrom the other two, and its conceptual and linguistic relationships to them explored. The set-apart sacred is then clarified, and extendedto include things set apart 1) by both individualsand social groups, and 2) because of both natural and supernaturalassociation. A new typologyof the sacred is introducedby intersecting thesedimensions,a nomenclatureis suggested,and the conceptualutilityof the resulting constructsdemonstratedby applyingthemto textsfrom the New YorkTimesand other discourse. he "sacred"is a key conceptin the sociology of religion and,I will argue,an importantconcept in social theorygenerally.Yet despiteits importanceand long pedigree the concept remainsundertheorized,and the termis unselfconsciouslyused in such disparateways that meaning is sometimes unclear.Considerthese uses in a recent (September2002) issue of Journalfor the ScientificStudyof Religion wherethe termis central enough to appearin the title or abstract:

rT

* *

"Returnof the Sacred:ReintegratingReligion in the Social Sciences" (Ebaugh2002) Spiritualtranscendencerefers to a perceived experience of the sacred that affects one's self-perception, feelings, goals, and ability to transcendone's difficulties (Seidlitz et al. 2002:439). * "Claiming Sacred Ground:Pilgrims and Politics at Glastonburyand Sedona" (Tucker2002; This is a review of the book by AdrianJ. Ivakhiv.)

In the first example it appearsthat "thesacred"is simply being used as a more interesting term for "religion."The referenceis to the organizationsand/orinstitutionsof religion, as in the book reviewed in Review of Religious Research (Aho 2000) entitled TheAmbivalence of the Sacred:Religion, Violence,and Reconciliation.In the second and thirdexamples, however, the authorsmove into more difficult conceptualterrain. By "experienceof the sacred' Seidlitz et al. (2002:440 [quotingLarson, Swyers, and McCullough 1998:20]; emphasisadded)are referringto "a socially influencedperception of eithersome divinebeing, or some sense of ultimaterealityof truth"-what James([1902] 1982) called "religiousexperience,"andhas since been namedandconceptualizedin a variety of ways (Evans 2002). In otherwords, Seidlitz et al. use "sacred"here in referencenot to religion but to what might be called the supernatural,divine, or transcendentrealitythat religion confronts,describes,or mediates.'Approachesto the "sacred"in this second sense will not be developed in this article, though the topic is properlycentralto the scientific study of religion, and "it is nothing shortof shocking, if one thinks aboutit, that the soci32

The Sacred ology of religionhas virtuallyignoredreligiousexperienceas a venue for researchand theory" (Swatos 1993:xv). The meaning of "sacred"is most problematicin the thirdexample, where it modifies "ground."The review makes clear that the two "spiritualplaces" described by Ivakhiv (Glastonbury,England and Sedona, Arizona) "are noteworthy because of their alleged 'ecospiritual'powers,"but it is also clear that they "attractthousandsof New Age travelers each year"for social and historical reasons as well (Tucker2002:595). Eitherwayand surely both in this case-the "sacredness"or special set-apartquality of the place is conceptuallydistinct from any transcendentreality that may have markedit as such or is still manifestthere.Clearly,the set-apartqualityhere designatedas "sacred"may be shared For examples,conby places andthingsthatdon'thave any connectionto the supernatural. siderthe venerationdescribedin this sentencefromTheMcDonaldizationof Society:"Many people identify stronglywith McDonald's;in fact to some it has become a sacredinstitution. On the opening of the McDonald'sin Moscow, one journalistdescribedit as the 'ultimate icon of Americana"' (Ritzer 1993:5). Here the set-apartnessdenoted by the word "sacred"differs vastly from the transcendentreality indicated by the same term used by Seidlitz et al. (2002). I chose these examples from JSSR-fortuitously united under a single cover-both becausethey arerecentexamplesof articlesin which "sacred"appearsin the title or abstract, and because they serendipitouslyillustrate-quite well in the first two cases, and acceptably so in the third-what I propose as a useful three-categoryscheme for understanding "sacred."2 In broadstrokes,the term "sacred"is primarilyused: 1) as a dressed-upsynonym for "religion"or "religious;" and 2) to denote "transcendent reality" or "transcendent;" 3) in referenceto things set apart with special meaning, as in Durkheim.

Of course it is possible to simultaneouslyinvoke more than one of these meanings, as in "sacredshrine." It is the Durkheimianconcept thatwill be developed in this paper,but first I will illustratefurtherthe variedusage of "sacred"in scholarlydiscourse,suggest how the meaning of importantconcepts like "religion,""secular,"and "secularization"are often bound to one's understandingof "sacred,"differentiatethe set-apartsacredfrom the concepts "religion" and "transcendent,"and provide some explanationsas to why they have been used synonymously.As one step towardsthese ends I performeda full-text searchof articlesin top general sociology journals for those in which the terms "sacred"and "secular"both appear.3The three highest-scoring articles-Leuba (1913), Becker (1950), and Crippen (1988)-span the twentiethcenturyand help to illustratethese points. Respondingto "amost remarkablerecentessay dealing with the conceptionof religion" by Durkheim(who was still alive), Leuba(1913) not so muchchallengesDurkheimas talks past him, becauseplainlythey attachdifferentmeaningsto the term"sacred."Leubais troubled not by the thesis thatthe fundamentalcharacteristicof religion is its concernwith the sacred,butby Durkheim'sinsistenceon the "social-traditional originof the sacred"(1913:325). from the only source of sacredness,the tradiBy contrast,Leubamaintainsthat "far being tionalcannotbe considered,in any truesense"even "oneof its sources"(1913:325; emphasis in original).Soundingvery muchlike the GermantheologianRudolfOtto,Leubaexplains that "theexperienceof the sacred"is always characterizedby 33

Review of Religious Research an element of awe ... fear held in check by admiration...neutralizedby curiositywhich the mysteriousness of the sacredobject arouses, and by knowledge of ways and means by which to enter into relation with the sacredpower.... The sacredobjecthas a hold upon us, we standin dynamicrelationwith it, and this relationis not one of equal to equal,but of superiorto inferior;i.e., we feel dependentupon it. Awfulness (a complex of fear and admiration)and the belief that the greatand portentouspower reaches down to us and thatwe may by appropriateactions controlit within certainlimits seem to me the essential characteristicsof sacredobjects (1913:325-326).4

Farfrom Durkheim'ssociological sacred,"originatingin a symbolic projectionof the clan or tribal group identity" (Oxtoby 1993), Leuba's transcendent"sacred"projects its own power in the otherdirection.His phenomenologicalapproachto the sacredis unsurprising given thatreligious experiencewas one of Leuba'smajorconcerns(Stark1965:97). In his Social Forces articleon "sacredand secularsocieties"Becker (1950:361) asserts he "haslong workedwith the sacred-seculardichotomy"andis preparedto "dealwith the sacred-secularin some detail."However,his use of "sacred"moves well beyondDurkheim: "a sacredsociety is one thatelicits from or impartsto its members,by means of sociation, an unwillingnessand/orinabilityto respondto the culturallynew. .... A secularsociety is one thatendows its memberswith readinessand/orcapacityto change"(p. 363). "Formulated differently:a society thatincorporatesand sustainsan impermeablevalue-systemis sacred;one that embodies a permeablevalue-systemis secular"(pp. 363-364). It soundsas thoughBeckeris describing"traditional" versus"modem"society-the former, "whetheranalyzedby the nostalgic scholarsor the critics is a society that is characterized by homogeneity,religious values . . . where little change is occurring.There is a sense of sharedmorality"(Englandand Johnson2001:10). For Durkheim,no doubt,there was a connectionbetween the sacredand the traditional.In thatregard,Leuba (1913:324) had set forthDurkheim'sconceptionthus:"thesacredis a specific qualitybelonging to the traditional,to that which the individual finds alreadymade, to myths, to dogmas, transmitted by society."In Becker's mind, however, this association seems to have fused, and "sacred"appearssynonymouswith "traditional." Becker's usage is atypical,but illustrates how one's understandingof "sacred"is interlockedwith that of its sometimes-antonym "secular,"and thereforesometimes with conceptions of secularization.This point looms large in Crippen's(1988) article. Crippen correctly recognizes that Durkheim's sacred "need not refer to any specific domain(let alone a 'supernatural' one)"(p. 328), and acceptsDurkheim'sdefinitionof reliit as follows: gion, modifying Religions are unified systems of beliefs and ritualsrelativeto conceptionsof the sacred(thatwhich is set apartand/orforbidden),beliefs and ritualsthat encourageindividualsto subordinatetheirapparentselfinterestin relationto the collectively expressed interestof sovereign organizations(p. 326; emphasis in original).

When rigorouslyapplyingboth of these propositions-that religion is based on the sacred, and that"sacred"here can mean anythingthatis set apart-one is left with an overly broad conceptionof religion. Crippenapplies the logic and concludesthatany organizationmay be termed"religious"if its rituals,symbols, or ideas "encourageindividualsto subordinate their apparentself-interest"(p. 327). An outgrowthof this conceptualization,which forms of "secularization"as the increasingselfthe backboneof the article,is his reinterpretation subordinationof individualsto the "religions"of nation-statesand other abstractcollectivities,ratherthanto the ideas and authorityof "religions"as thatphraseis morecommonly understood. 34

The Sacred

DIFFERENTIATING CONCEPTS The Set-ApartSacred and Religion Crippen'sarticleillustrateshow both "religion"and "sacred,"as well as theirrelationship to each other,have been problematicconcepts since Durkheim,and because of him (Stark,2001). Durkheimassertedthat"allknownreligiousbeliefs, whethersimple or complex, presentone common characteristic:they presupposea classification of all the things ... into two classes or opposed groups ... profane and sacred" (1951:52). Laterin The ElementaryForms he famously defined religion as "a unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things, that is to say, things set apartand forbidden"5(1951:62). There are three problems related to this interestingbut flawed definition of religion: the ambiguity,breadth,and foundationalnatureof "the sacred." The firstproblemis thatthis centralconceptremainsvague (Stark2001; StarkandFinke 2000:89) andlargely tautological-the sacredis what the groupdefines as sacred.Second, (perhapsto accommodateBuddhism)6Durkheimtriedto leave himself some wiggle room by choosing a word thatmay connote "religious"and/or"set apart"-a termthatis understood as referringto religion,but not necessarilyso. Thus, while the phrase"sacredthings" is not problematicby itself when used as a referenceto religiousthingsor to set-apartthings in society, basing religion on the sacred creates either a tautology (i.e., "religionis concernedwith religious things")or else plantsthe seeds for unrulygrowthin the meaningof "religion"by not requiringa supernaturalreferent, or any other particularreferent (i.e., "religionis concernedwith whatevera society sets apart").Thus, because it is based on a substantivelyunboundedconcept, the thirdproblemis the derivativenatureof Durkheim's concept of religion. In termsof conceptualizingreligion,the sacred,andtheirrelationshipto each otherthen I suggest the following: As is probablyapparent,I thinkwe shouldmaintainthe restrictive definitionsof religion used by early scholars(e.g., James [1902] 1982:31, 53), and championed in recent years by Stark and colleagues (e.g., Stark2001; Stark and Bainbridge 1996:39; Starkand Finke 2000:89), limiting the term to systems concernedin some way with the divine or supernatural.The sacred,on the otherhand,shouldbe conceptualizedas something that may or may not be associated with the supernatural.(The conceptualand linguistic relationshipsbetween them will be explored in the section following this one, and this point will become a majorfocus of the final section.) Lastly,while there is obviously mutual overlap between religion and the sacred, we must reject the relationship between them suggestedby Durkheim(andthereforehis definition of religion as well). Having released religion and the sacred from the unidirectionaltandem relationship posited by Durkheim,four possible scenariosemerge in its place, dependingon how each of the terms is conceptualizedwith referenceto the supernatural:1) Like Leuba (1913), one may see religion as substantively concerned with the supernatural,and "sacred"as referringto that same transcendentreality,in which case they are relatedby definition. 2) Following Crippen(1988), one may define religion as referringto anythingto which one subordinatesoneself, and "sacred"as simply the "set apart,"in which case they are related to the extent that a particularinstance of the former(e.g., the United States) and latter (e.g., the U.S. flag, or national anthem)are associated. 3) My own approachis to define religion as substantivelyconcernedwith the supernatural,but the "sacred"as referringto the "set apart."In this case again they are related only when they overlap-i.e., when a 35

Review of Religious Research sacredobjectis also a religiousobject.4) The final if unlikelypossibilitywouldbe to define religion in Crippen'sbroadsense, but the sacredin termsof the supernatural. Stark(2001:102) complainedthat "havingequatedreligion with the sacred, too many scholarshave proceededto discover the sacred(hence religion) virtuallyeverywhere,thus deprivingthe termof analyticalpower."Maintaininga restrictivedefinitionof religion,while more explicitly expandingconceptionsof the sacred,allows one to recognizethe sacredin religion-and otherspheres-without necessarilyfindingreligion in everythingsacred. Having thus distinguishedDurkheim'sset-apartsacredfrom the sometimes-associated concept of religion, I will now distinguishthis sense of sacred from transcendent,supernatural,etc.

The Set-ApartSacred and Transcendent Why is the term "sacred"used to signify both the naturaland supernatural?Why is it that,even as a technicalterm, scholars,journalists,and othershave used it in so many differentways, to describeboth otherworldly,transcendentthings, andthe dearly-heldaspects of the naturalorderand its institutions?We could probablyblame both scholarlyimprecision, and simply the vagariesof language. In any language, of course, many words come to acquiremultipledefinitionsandconnotations,andthis is especiallytrueof English,made synonym-richby its dual (GermanicandLatin)linguisticpedigree.The conceptualandlinguistic history of the "sacred"is especially interesting,and meritsbrief discussion, given its importancein the discourseof both laypersonsand scholarsof religion. "Tothe Roman,sacrummeantwhatbelonged to the gods or was in theirpower"(Colpe 1993:511). "Comingfrom Latin by way of French"the word "sacred"graduallybegan to appearin the centuriesfollowing "theNormanconquestof Englandin the eleventh century, which superimposeda Latinvocabularyon a Germanicone" (Oxtoby 1993:434). This was followed by a partialseparationin meaningbetween the newer word "sacred"and the olderAnglo-Saxon term"holy"(Oxtoby 1973:511),which generallyreferencesthe divine. Summarizing"threecopious pages of material"on "holy"from the OxfordEnglishDictionaryOxtoby(1993:434) says that"theusage dividesinto threecategories:first,the attributes of God... or the divine; second, the attributesof thingsthatderivetheirholiness from associationwith God; and third,the attributesof people and actionsconformingto whatis held to be God's expectation."When "sacred"entered the language it took some of this "semanticrange of holy: specifically, it referredto respectedor veneratedobjects but not to the divine itself and not to personsas individuals"(Oxtoby 1993:434;emphasisadded). "Whatwas at stake in the extension of the word sacred in English usage appearsto have been an effort to describe the venerationaccorded by humanbeings ratherthan to assert thatthe thingin questionhadbeen hallowedby God"(Oxtoby 1993:434;emphasisadded). But as is clear from some of the examples given previously,use of the termin referenceto the divine, supernatural,or numinous-and to things like religion that are associatedwith the them-remains to this day. Anotherimportantpoint is thatthese distinctionsin meaningdo not necessarilyfind parallels in otherlanguages-meaning both thatotherlanguagesmay not have two (or more) such correspondingwords (see Figure 1), and thateven if they do, theirconnotationsmay not have preciseEnglishequivalents.To illustratehow this has resultedin conceptualmuddiness I will stay with the example of "holy"and "sacred,"which bringsus to the seminal works of Durkheim(1951), Otto (1976), and Eliade [1959] 1987. 36

The Sacred

Figure 1 Selected Language Equivalents to "Holy" and "Sacred" Term(s)

Language English Latin

holy sanctum

sacred

French

saint

sacre

sacrum

German

heilig

Russian

sviaty (Based on Oxtoby,1973 and 1993)

As discussed above, in Les Formes ElementairesDurkheim(1912:65) defines religion as "un systeme solidaire de croyance et de pratiquesrelatives a des choses sacrees."His "chosessacrees"is generallyrendered"sacredthings,"which seems appropriategiven the alignmentin meaningbetween "sacre"and "sacred"(see Figure 1), and given Durkheim's conceptionof religion as manifestingsociety itself, as opposedto mediatinga transcendent realm.And Otto's classic Das Heilige (1947), which appearedfive years later,has come to us as The Idea of the Holy (1976), which also seems appropriate,given his focus on the numinous-though we may owe this translationas much to fortuneas to intentionalprecision, as will be shown. The conceptualblur becomes apparentwhen we turnto Eliade's seminal work on the sacred,Le Sacre'et le Profane (1965), translatedinto Germanas Das Heilige unddas Profane (1957), and into English as The Sacred and the Profane ([1959] 1987).7His introduction to the work begins with praise and discussion of none otherthan Otto's Das Heilige, which he sees as germanewith his own effort ([1959] 1987:8-10), and he makes clear that for him "thesacredalways manifestsitself as a realityof a wholly differentorderfrom 'natural' realities" ([1959] 1987:10)-"a reality that does not belong to our world" ([1959] 1987:11).Notes AndrewGreeley:"Ifelt for manyyearsthatEliade'sradicalPlatonismwas more a metaphorthan a statementof his literalbelief. However,he autographeda copy of his autobiographical novel TheForbiddenForestfor me with the words, 'who is also trapped in the labyrinth"'(1995:19). For Eliade, then, "sacre"means somethingvery differentthan it does for Durkheim,thoughin both cases it has been translatedinto English as "sacred." or some othertermconnotingan unseen orderof existence Perhaps"holy,""transcendent," would bettercapturewhatEliade means.In any case, it is only familiaritywith these works that allows one to graspwhich concept the authoris tryingto convey. Note thatin German,which lacks the holy/sacreddistinction(see Figure 1), the titles of both Otto'sandEliade'sworksbegin Das Heilige, yet the title of the formerhas been translated into English as The Idea of the Holy and the latter(from French)as The Sacred and the Profane. This calls attentionto the conflating effect of using a single term to describe 37

Review of Religious Research more than one concept, and points to the difficulties of translation,the importanceof precision in writing, and the challenges of shifting semantics across and within languages. Note too this translationof the very first sentence in Eliade's introductionto The Sacred and the Profane: "Theextraordinaryinterestarousedall over the world by Rudolf Otto's Das Heilige (The Sacred),publishedin 1917, still persists"([1959] 1987:8). The translator,WillardTrask,doesn't make the sacred/holydistinction,and as hintedat above, neither does JohnHarvey,who translatedOtto's work. In fact, Harveyaddedthis final sentenceto the end of chapterone: "This attemptwe are now to make with respect to the quite distinctive categoryof the holy or sacred"(Otto 1976:4).8In sum, then: In the English-speakingworld, writerson the natureof religion in generalhave referredsometimesto the holy and sometimes to the sacred as thoughthe phenomenawere identical and the terminologya rather incidentalmatterof personaltaste. This has been truenot merely when the subjecthas been mentionedin passing aproposof anotherargument;it has also been the case in criticalworks on this very topic, such as MirceaEliade'sTheSacredand the Profane.... Eliade'sgenerationhas investedthe sacredwith the same connotationsthatOtto's generationfound in the holy (Oxtoby 1993:434).

Before turningto the set-apartsacredI want to providetwo quotationsto briefly show that"sacred"is sometimesused in referencenot to a specifically transcendentrealmin the sense of supernaturalbeings and such, but also in a more vague or general sense to any experiencesandthings thattranscendthe ordinary,thoughI will not elaboratefurtherupon this distinction.Firstan explicit statementto thateffect fromAndrewGreeley's discussion of psychedeliain the early 70s: "By the sacredI mean not only the other-worldly,but also the ecstatic, the transcendental,that which takes man out of himself and puts him in contact with the basic life forces of the universe"(1971:66). Second, from a book by Andrew Schmookler(1993:5): The experienceof the sacredvibratesthe deepest partsof our being; it brings our realizationof just how rich is the music of our lives. In my own life, those moments when my instrumenthas opened up to the reverberationsof the sacred standalmost as a differentstate of being from my more usual, more narrow band of receptivity.

Throughouthis chapter"NothingSacred,"as in this passage, it is never clear the extent to which "sacred"refers to set-apartmoments and things of special value vs. a truly transcendentreality.As is often the case, and though the concept is centralto the chapter,his use of the termis unclear(in this case even aftera carefulreading),andhe seems to assume thatthe readerunderstandswhat is meant,thoughhe never defines the term. Having providedexamples of the various ways in which "sacred"is used, and having attemptedto distinguishthe set-apartfrom the religious andtranscendent,I now turnto the set-apartsacreditself, suggesting an analyticalframeworkthathighlightsand clarifies the multidimensionalityof the concept.

CLARIFYING AND EXTENDING THE SET-APARTSACRED We impute no special value to most of the places in which we live, work, and play, or to the objectswithinthem.We move to a new city for the rightoffer.We throwaway things for which we have no more use. But what if the city is Jerusalem?What if those things invoke emotion-ladenmemories?One may go to extraordinarylengthsto retainor acquire, to inhabitor protectwhat one considers "sacred."Indeed,many are quite willing to make or reject remarkableexchange offers-including life itself-to literallyor metaphorically hold somethingsacred. 38

The Sacred I thinkthe featurecommonto the set-apartsacredis its valuationbeyondutility,andthat this mentalsetting-apartof certainthings,sometimesaccompaniedby a literalsettingapart, is largely based on non-rational(which is not necessarily to say irrational)features, like theiremotionalvalue. Furtherdevelopmentof these ideas is beyondthe scope of this paper, but in any case, the conceptmotivates,shapes,constrains,andjustifies both individualand collective behavior and organization, and like gender, ethnicity, and other widely-used schemas, it orientshumanbehavioracross contexts. For these reasons the set-apartsacred is an essential concept not only in the sociology of religion, but also in social theory generally;it has theoreticalutility both in and beyond its traditionalhome in the sociology of religion. While Durkheim'suse of the sacred as a foundationfor religion is unprofitable,some of his descriptionsof the concept itself are useful. To wit, he recognizes both that "there are sacredthings of every degree"(Durkheim1951:53; emphasisadded),and thatthereis variationin sacredtypes. (His observationaboutdegrees of sacrednesswill not be developed here, in favor of a simplifiedcategoricalrepresentation.)As examples of the latterhe lists an assortmentof tangible and non-tangiblethings that could be sacred-from rites, words, expressions,formulae,gestures,and movements,to "arock, a tree, a spring,a pebble, a piece of wood, a house, in a word,anythingcan be sacred.The circle of sacredobjects cannotbe determined,then, once for all. Its extent varies infinitely"(Durkheim1951:52). Durkheim'snotion that even "a piece of wood" can be sacredis illustratedin the writings of biological anthropologistRichardWrangham,who says: On a shelf in my office rests an undistinguishedpiece of wood the size of an airlinepillow. Half-rotted before it dried,it bearsthe typical scarsof forest life: holes boredby beetle larvae,a tearfrom a long-gone branch,cuts and scratchesfrom thejostlings of passing animals.It's an ordinarypiece of an ordinarytree, just like hundredsof othersuch fragmentsthatcould be found duringa half-hourwalk in Uganda'sKibale Forest (Wranghamand Peterson 1996:252).

Wranghammay, for effect, call it an "ordinarypiece of an ordinarytree,"but to him it's obviously far from ordinary.Among hundredsof similarfragments,this one has been literally set aparton the office shelf of a Harvardprofessorbecause of the tremendoussignificance it holds for Dr.Wrangham.(In an extraordinarydisplay of human-likecognition, a chimpanzee named Kakama,whom Wranghamhad studied for some time, carriedthe small log aroundas a toy baby.)This piece of wood, for Wrangham,has the characterof a sacredobject. Many of us have such sacredpersonalpossessions. As anotherexample of the set-apartsacred consider the changing of the guard at the Tombof the UnknownSoldier.Wouldanyone deny thatthis is a sacredritual?Yet describing such things as "sacred"tends to introducea religious flavor that may mask the sometimes secular natureof the sacred. Furthermore,in the Durkheimiantradition,"sacred" tends to suggest a group construct,though in fact something may be sacred solely to an individual.While these two ideas may not be new to many who readthis article,I believe that an explicit treatmentof them will be useful, especially when coupled with the introduction of a language and analytical frameworkthat makes them coherentin relation to each other. Along these lines then I want to describeand explore these two extensionsto traditional religiously-groundednotions of the set-apartsacred.First,we must include not only that which the groupupholdsas set apart,but also thatwhich is held sacredby individuals.Second, as discussed previously,we must recognize that the set-apartsacredrelates not only 39

Review of Religious Research

Figure 2 A Typology of the Sacred SacredSource

SacredHolder

Natural

Supernatural

Individual

Personal

Spiritual

Group

Civil

Religious

to a perceived supernaturalrealm,but also to things in the secular,everydayworld. These differentdimensionsof the sacredmay be organizedin a simple typology. By intersecting the two dichotomies-individual and group,naturaland supernatural-we producea useful table that illuminatesfour differentcategoriesof the sacred. To put it anotherway, we intersect two dimensions: the sacred holder (the person or groupwho holds somethingsacred),andthe sourceof the sacred.I offer the resultingconcepts as simply what Giddenscalls "sensitizingdevices"(1984:326), andrecognize,as one reviewer put it, that "thereis always a certaindegree of arbitrarinessin these constructs, and one person'sham may be another'sgrits."For example, in contrastto my substantive approach,Demerathintersects "sacredexperiences that are either confirmatoryor compensatory"with those that are "eithermarginalor institutional"to produce a functional typology of the sacred(2000:5).9 I will illustratethe clarifyingpower of these sensitizing concepts by applying them to referencesin the New YorkTimesin which the term "sacred"was used. This approachis not withoutits problems,given that 1) a word may be used sarcastically,as a synonym, or in other ways to mean something other than what it literally denotes, and conversely, 2) words otherthan "sacred"may express the concept of sacredness.Thus, we shouldrecognize the conceptof sanctity(or "thesacred")not only when the Hope Diamondis referred to as a "sacredicon" (PBS 1999), and when an authorcalls free marketsthe "sacredcow of Americanpolitics" (Gray 1998:3), but also when a sportswritercalls YankeeStadium "baseball'smost-hallowedstadium"(Bienvenu1999), or when Social SecurityandMedicare are referredto as "the two most sacrosanctof governmentprograms"(Stevenson 1999). Like the famous object and widely acceptedeconomic ideology, the sportsarenaand popular social programsare sacred ("hallowed"and "sacrosanct")because of the high nonrationalvalue attachedto them. Examples using adjectives free of religious flavor could also be found to describe this mental (and literal) setting apartof things that are imbued with meaning and importance,or connected with identity,and whose perceived violation thereforeelicits strongemotion. Recognizing that the link between denotationand connotationmay not be direct and obvious, and that both meanings inferredand meanings intendedare more complex than explicit definitionmay allow, let us look at how the term "sacred"is being used colloquially in the United States.Towardthatend, I did a textualsearchof the New YorkTimesfor the two-week period runningfrom February22nd to March7th of 2001. I found that the 40

The Sacred word appeared42 times in 32 differentarticles.Less than half of the referenceshad anything to do with a transcendentreality or religion, and in most of those thatdid it was simply used as a synonym, as in "sacredmusic" meaning "religiousmusic."As often as not, the word was used to identify land, people, values, etc. that hold great significance for a personor groupof people, and which arethereforethoughtto be entitledto special respect, deference,protection,and so forth.As Durkheimsaid, these sacredthings were often those that "interdictionsprotectand isolate"(1951:56). But unlike the commonunderstandingof Durkheim'sformulation,or ratherextendingit, the sacredthings referencedhere are both collective and individual,religious and non-religious.In otherwords, colloquial usage of the term "sacred"illuminatesthe multidimensionalityintroducedabove.

DIMENSIONS OF THE SET-APARTSACRED Now let us briefly flesh out each of the four categoriesin the typology, drawingexamples from the New YorkTimesarticlesand other sources. (Interestingly,all four of the categories were represented,even in this small sample!)

The Personal Sacred That which acquires special meaning in the natural(i.e., non-supernatural)experiences of individualsis designatedthe "personalsacred."To recognizethe individually-held sacredis not to deny social influence in what the individualholds sacred.For example, a person may save a flower between the pages of a book partlybecause flowers are recognized symbols of affection in the person's culture.The point, however, is that the particularfloweris sacredonly to thatindividual.Anotherfamilymembermightacceptguardianship of "the flower grandpagave grandmaon the day they got engaged,"but the object is not sacredto largercollectivities. AnthropologistWrangham'spiece of wood is an example of the personalsacred.Therewas one good exampleprintedin the New YorkTimesduringthe period I examined: Husfred-Norwegian for domestic tranquillity [sic]-is a quasi-sacredvalue for Hans Olav. So is his evening rationof Cognac and Mahlerand the undisturbedenjoymentof the nightly news program(Eder 2001).

Here we have an abstractvalue (tranquility)held in such importancethat an individualis describedas holding it sacred. One suspects that interferingwith it, or his nightly drinks, music, and news program,would result in sanctionsof some kind. To use anotherexample, in his interestingpiece "The Ghosts of Place," Michael Bell describes how location-evokedmemories of others transformundifferentiatedspace into place (which is differentiated,named,has meaning,and is thereforesacred).The "sense of the presence of those who are not physically there"(Bell 1997:813) creates what I would call a personalsacredplace. Ourchildhoodhomes, personalplaces of retreat,and othersignificantfamilial and romanticspots are such places of the personalsacred.

The Spiritual Sacred Things thatare sacredbecause of theirpersonal connectionwith the supernaturalseem to be rarenowadays.Certainly,though,therehave been, and continueto be, individualsfor whom special locations (e.g., places to commune with God) or personal objects (e.g., a divining rod, or magic implements)are sacredbecause of theirconnectionwith a spiritual 41

Review of Religious Research

realm.Again, in my small newspapersample I found one such example of what I'm calling the spiritualsacred.The speakerwants it clear that,contraryto what those aroundhim might think, it is connection to a transcendentGod, not the past presence of an historical figure, thatconfers sanctityto the land. This land is sacred,not because GeorgeWashingtoncampedhere, but because God createdit (Newman 2001).

The Civil Sacred The categoryof "civil sacred"is perhapsthe most interestingto social scientists,including those who specialize in the sociology of religion, for much of the sacredin contemporary society has more a civil than a religious nature.There were many references in the Timesto things that social groups recognized as sacred because of their relationshipsto worldly institutionsand naturalprocesses, ratherthantheirrelationshipsto a divine reality. Perhapsthe best example was this: *Critics also assertthatthe 7.4-acre [WorldWarII] memorialproject,which will requirethe lowering and shrinkingof the [WashingtonD.C.] Mall's existing RainbowPool, will make it difficult, if not impossible, for there ever to be anothergatheringakin to MartinLutherKing's 1963 rally. Simply put, this is as close to sacredpublic groundas the nation has-a space that itself memorializesAmerica's history and ideals (Kimmelman2001).

Here again are Bell's ghosts of place, along with the symbolic memorializationof a nation state, and its groupideals. Much could be writtenaboutthe social (andliteral,in this case) constructionof the sacred,the contestedsacred,andthe meaningof desecration.Fromwar, to politics, to advertising,much energygoes into the creation,co-opting,capturing,and/or desecrationof sacredthings. This is, of course, why Osamabin Laden targetedthe World TradeCenter,Pentagon,and apparentlythe U.S. Capitol:they are sacredicons of American economic, military,andpolitical power.Here aremore examplesfrom the Timesof the "civil sacred"-human life, canonizedwriters,and the political power to grantpardons: * The life of murdervictims is so sacred that there are cases in which society must resortto the ultimate sanction(Firestone2001). * Even writerswhom we now thinkof as sacred,like ZoraNeale Hurstonand Emily Dickinson, came dangerously close to being lost forever (Rehak2001). * So if the businessof pardon-gettingbecameakinto traditionallobbying,whatwas wrongwith that?Pamela Stuart,a Washingtonlawyer who has workedon pardons,said that the power to grantpardonsshould be more sacredbecause it's a safety valve "forwhen thereis a miscarriageof justice; it's not somethingthat shouldbe lobbied like a tax bill" (Lewis 2001).

Finally,considerthis statementfrom a theatricalreview, which nicely captureswhat is for Durkheima key aspect of the sacred:prohibition,or inviolability. * 0, Leenane, Leenane:that inbred,claustrophobicworld in which existence has become so tedious that nothing is held sacred-including matricide,patricide,fratricideand suicide-if it livens things up a bit (Brantley2001).

In this category one would place the U.S. flag, a sacredcivil symbol whose protectionis thoughtto be so importantthat there have been numerousmovementsto amendthe U.S. Constitutionin orderto protectit. The readershould note thatthe construct"civil sacred,"as here used, differs markedly from Bellah's (1967) concept of "civil religion."The latteris a kind of nationalizedmeta42

The Sacred religion that truly invokes, even if largely ceremoniously,a collective belief in the existence of God and divine involvement in civic affairs.As in all religions, there are various manifestationsof the set-apartsacred in Bellah's "civil religion" (e.g., occasions like the Presidentialinauguration).To the extent that such occasions are sacredto the nation-state I would place them in this category;to the extent they are a sacredpartof America's"civil religion" I would put them in the next category,"the religious sacred."Of course such a cleanly-bounded distinction is not always possible (see "BlurryCategory Boundaries" below), but in any case, thoughBellah tangentiallydescribesthings that might be labeled "sacred,"his concept "civil religion" itself refers to a form of religion per se, not to the sacredin the set-apartsense developed here.

The Religious Sacred In the New YorkTimes,assuredlyone of the more secularnewspapers,there were relatively few examples of the "religioussacred,"or referencesto things imbued with otherworldlymeaningaccordingto the definitionof some religiouscollectivity.But here aretwo clear examples: * Millions of cows, consideredsacredin the region, are not eaten by humans(Dugger 2001). * Irancorrectlyremindedthe Talibanthat Islam does not preachthe destructionof objects sacredto other religions andcultures.Last night the U.N. issued an urgentplea to sparethe two giantBuddhas(New York Times2001).

The destructionof the giant statuesof Buddhaby the Talibanregime highlightsthe lightning rod for conflict that the sacred can be. Indeed, many of the world's great and lasting conflicts are between communitiescontestingthe sacred.Such conflict may be over ownership or controlof what two or more claimantsagree is sacred(as with lands in the Middle East),over whatone side recognizesas sacred,andthe otherseeks to desecrateor destroy for that very purpose (as with the Buddha statues in Afghanistan),or over what one side sees as sacred,and anotherregardsas profane(as with areasin Australiaconsideredsacred to native aborigines,but defined as touristattractionsby the government).

BLURRY CATEGORY BOUNDARIES We should recognize that these constructs are ideal types, and therefore have fuzzy boundariesin the real world. The distinctionbetween individualand group,or naturaland supernatural,is not as distinctin some cultures-particularly in the East, amongoppressed peoples of the West, and in the pre-EnlightenmentWest-as they are in the modernWest. There was a good example of this in the Times: * The Wailua[riverarea],Derek explained,had been a sacredarea,limited to the alii, the Polynesiankings and royalty. On its banks-still lined with tall royal palms-there had been several heiau, or temples (Strauch2001).

It seems clearhere thatfor the Polynesians,the worldly andotherworldly,andthereforethe polity and religious institutions,were not at all clearly differentiated.The same could be said of Europein the days of the Holy RomanEmpire.As anotherexample, Navajo medicine bundlesor "jish,"which refersto both the "assemblageof sacredequipment"and "the bag-like containersin which the equipmentis kept"(Frisbie 1987:9), seem to overlap all four categories.They connect with both realities, and they are recognized as sacredby the Navajo people as a whole, but also in a particularway to given individualsand families. 43

Review of Religious Research A Navajojish is sacredand those who use it operatein a ceremonialworld where medical and religious beliefs are boundtogetherin a way thatnon-Navajossometimesfind incomprehensible.As a sacreditem, thejish is surroundedby all kinds of rules thatdemarcateits statusandprovidefor its protectionandproper use. These rules are known to jish owners and often to theirfamilies as well (Frisbie 1987:9).

CONCLUSION The term "sacred"is used in a variety of ways, and has remaineda poorly developed concept in the social sciences. To clarify mattersI have describedthree general senses in which the termis used-religious, transcendent,and set apart-and conceptuallyand linguisticallydistinguishedthe latterDurkheimiansense fromthe othertwo. I have also fleshed out this concept,andextendedit to includethingsset apart1) by both individualsand social groups,and 2) because of both naturaland supernaturalassociation.By intersectingthese dimensions I have introduceda new typology and nomenclatureof the sacred, and illustratedits conceptualutility by applying the resultingconstructsto both the popularpress and to scholarlyworks. Perhapsscholarlydiscourse aboutthe sacredhas been limited, and largely confined to the sociology of religion, because the sacred has been over-narrowlyconceptualized in terms of group totems, mores, symbols, and ritual activities set apartand orientedto the supernaturalor otherworldly-what I am calling the religious sacred. By focusing solely on the religious sacred,one may fail to recognize the similartotems, mores, symbols, and activities in social institutionslike nation states, the family, race, class, and gender.Thus, one may overlook the applicabilityof the concept to superficiallydisparatephenomena, such as the clamorover alleged accessibilityof the Lincoln Bedroomin exchangefor large political donations,and the backlashover the U.S. Army's decision to let all soldiers wear the black beretpreviouslyreservedfor the elite Rangers.As in much of public debateand conflict, there are underlyingnotions here of the sacred-in these cases, what I'm calling the civil sacred. Our treatmentof people, objects, places, etc., is also guided in partby personalvaluations of the sacred,even when social groups do not recognize such items as set apartand imbued with special meaning.These, too, may be orientedby both the naturaland supernatural.The terms proposed for these categories of the sacred are, respectively, the personal sacred,andthe spiritualsacred.The formercouldincludeeverythingfroman heirloom, to one's wedding ring; the latter,from memories of religious experience to the locales of transcendentexperience. We all use the conceptof the set-apartsacred.While I hope to have distinguishedit from otherconceptsreferencedby the same term,clarifiedits meaninggenerally,andhighlighted its multidimensionality,I do not expect thatfutureuse will always follow the semanticand conceptual distinctions here proposed. Hopefully, however, the conceptual refinement offered here will at a minimumput us in a betterposition to evaluatewhat a given author means by the term. * Direct correspondenceto MattEvans,Departmentof Sociology, 800 SWKT,BrighamYoungUniversity,Provo, UT 84602. Email: [email protected] authorwould like to acknowledgethe helpful comments and suggestions of the editor and four anonymousreviewers, and offer special thanksto HowardM. Bahr,who provided valuablesubstantiveand editorialfeedbackon several drafts.An earlierversion of this paperwas presentedat the annualmeeting of the Pacific Sociological Association,April 1, 2001, in San Francisco,CA.

44

The Sacred

NOTES 'Otherexamples of this less common usage of "sacred"include Niemeyer's "The Recovery of 'The Sacred'?" (1989) and Twiss and Conser's Experience of the Sacred (1992), though as a furtherillustrationof confusing usage, in the latterwork only portionsof these "readingsin the phenomenologyof religion"(especiallyin the first section, "ReligiousExperience:Numinous, Mystical, and Feminist")involve experiences with the transcendent reality mediatedby religion. 2Dependingon a variety of factors, dictionariesseem to provide four (e.g., Merriam-Webster'sCollegiate Dictionary 1993) to six (e.g., AmericanHeritage Dictionary 2000; The OxfordEnglish Dictionary 1989) modemusage definitions (the essence of which are all representedhere, or can be producedby combining two of these meaning categories), plus sub-definitionsand archaicmeanings. Interestingly,I have not found the term recognized as a noun, except in the obsolete and very old plural form (see OED 1989), or in derived forms such as "sacredness." 3IsearchedAmerican Sociological Review (1936-1997), American Journal of Sociology (1895-2000), Social Forces (1925-2000), ContemporarySociology (1972-1997), andAnnualReview of Sociology (1975-1997). 4Atone point in the articleLeuba(1913:326-327) does seem to temperthis descriptionof the sacredas encounterwith-the-numinouswith a more Durkheimianperspective. 5WhileDurkheimdefines "sacredthings"as "set apartand forbidden"(1951:62; emphasisadded),I see the "forbidden"aspect of the sacredas merely one possible characteristicsthatspringsfrom its set-apartness,ratherthan a fundamentalaspect of the sacredalong with set-apartness.For example, as is often the case, the "sacredpublic ground"describedlaterby Kimmelman(2001) is publicly accessible, not forbidden. 6Starkand Finke (2000:89-90; emphasisin original)suggest Durkheimchose "sacred"and omitted a link to the supernaturalbecause he believed religion existed in "all societies"but mistakenlythoughtBuddhismlacked any supernaturalelements. He therefore"felt it necessary to omit a supernaturalcomponentfrom his definition in orderto salvage the generalization." 7Thepublication dates are somewhat confusing because althoughEliade wrote The Sacred and the Profane in French (completing it in 1956), it was first published in German(Eliade 1957). Even so, WillardTraskwould have translatedit for the 1959 English-language edition from the original French manuscript(Rennie 2001a, 2001b), though the earliest Frenchedition that I have been able to locate was not publisheduntil 1965 (see Eliade 1965). 8Acommentin Oxtoby's article (1993) made me awareof Harvey'sadditionto the text. 9Demerath(2000:5-7) calls the resultingfour cells The Sacred as: "Integrative"("marginalexperiencesthat are confirmatory"),"Quest"(involving "compensatorymarginality"),"Collectivity"("theinstitutionalversion of the confirmatorysyndrome"),and "Counter-Culture" (involving "institutionalformswith a compensatoryfunction").

REFERENCES Aho, James.2000. "TheAmbivalenceof the Sacred:Religion, Violence, andReconciliation."Reviewof Religious Research41(4):562-563. AmericanHeritage Dictionary of the English Language. 2000. 4th ed. Boston, MA: HoughtonMifflin Company. Becker,Howard.1950. "Sacredand SecularSocieties: Consideredwith Referenceto Folk-Stateand SimilarClassifications."Social Forces 28(4):361-376. Bell, Michael. 1997. "The Ghosts of Place."Theoryand Society 26:813-836. Bellah, RobertN. 1967. "Civil Religion in America."Daedalus, Journal of the AmericanAcademyof Arts and Sciences 96(1):1-21. Bienvenu,Lionel. 1999. "InYourDreams:FA. Cup RemainsPlaygroundof FantasiesCome True."foxsports.com, Dec. 15. RetrievedMarch,2001 (http://www.foxsports.com/columns/stories/sl215foxbienvenul.sml). Brantley,Ben. 2001. "'A Skullin Connemara':LeenaneIII,Bones Flying."New YorkTimes,February23. Retrieved March8, 2001 (http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/23/arts/23SKUL.html). Colpe, Carsten.1993. "Sacredandthe Profane,The."TranslatedfromGermanby Russell M. Stockman.In Mircea Eliade (ed.) TheEncyclopediaof Religion, vol. 11-12 (2 vols. in 1), pp. 511-526. New York:MacmillanPublishing Company. Crippen,Timothy. 1988. "Old and New Gods in the ModernWorld:Towarda Theory of Religious Transformation." Social Forces 67(2):316-336. 45

Review of Religious Research Demerath,N.J. 2000. "TheVarietiesof SacredExperience:Findingthe Sacredin a SecularGrove."Journalfor the ScientificStudyof Religion 39(1):1-11. Dugger, Celia W. 2001. "BombayJournal:In Death, the Unlovely VultureIs Sorely Missed." New YorkTimes, March 1. RetrievedMarch8, 2001 (http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/01/world/01BOMB.html). Durkheim,Emile. 1912. Les Formes Elementairesde la VieReligieuse:Le SystemeTotemiqueen Australie.Paris, France:LibrairieFelix Alcan. 1951. The ElementaryForms of the Religious Life. Translatedfrom the Frenchby JosephWardSwain. New York:The Free Press. Ebaugh,Helen Rose. 2002. "Returnof the Sacred:ReintegratingReligion in the Social Sciences."Journalfor the ScientificStudyof Religion 41(3):385-395. Eder,Richard.2001. "'Music for the ThirdEar':The Anguish of Souls Echoes Across an Era."New YorkTimes, February23. RetrievedMarch8, 2001 (http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/23/arts/23BOOK.html). Eliade, Mircea. 1957. Das Heilige und das Profane: vom Wesendes Religiosen. Hamburg,Germany:Rowohlt. 1965. Le Sacre et le Profane. Paris,France:Gallimard. [1959] 1987. The Sacredand the Profane: TheNatureof Religion. Translatedfrom the Frenchby WillardR. Trask.San Diego, CA: HarcourtBrace & Company. England,Lynn,and BarryJohnson.2001. "ValueConvergence:ModernityandPost-Modernity."Presentedat the annualmeeting of the RuralSociological Society, August 18, Albuquerque,NM. Evans, MatthewT. 2002. "TheSociology of Religious Experience:Theory andApplied Research."Presentedat the annualmeeting of the Religious ResearchAssociation, November2, Salt Lake City, UT. Firestone,David. 2001. "GeorgiaExecutionis Stayed;ElectrocutionBecomes Issue."New YorkTimes,March7. RetrievedMarch8, 2001 (http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/07/national/07DEAT.html). Frisbie, CharlotteJ. 1987. Navajo Medicine Bundles or Jish: Acquisition,Transmission,and Disposition in the Past and Present.Albuquerque,NM: Universityof New Mexico Press. Giddens, Anthony. 1984. The Constitutionof Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration.Berkeley, CA: University of CaliforniaPress. Gray,John. 1998. False Dawn: The Delusions of Global Capitalism.New York:The New Press. Greeley,AndrewM. 1971. ComeBlow YourMind with Me. GardenCity, NY: Doubleday& Company. 1995. Religion as Poetry. New Brunswick,NJ: TransactionPublishers. James,William. [1902] 1982. The Varietiesof Religious Experience:A Studyin HumanNature.New York:Penguin Books. Kimmelman,Michael. 2001. "TurningMemory into Travesty."New YorkTimes,March4. RetrievedMarch 8, 2001 (http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/04/weekinreview/04KIMM.html). Larson,David B., James P. Swyers, and Michael E. McCullough,eds. 1998. ScientificResearch on Spirituality and Health:A ConsensusReport.Bethesda,MD: NationalInstitutefor HealthcareResearch. Leuba,JamesH. 1913. "Sociology and Psychology:The Conceptionof Religion andMagic and the Place of Psychology in Sociological Studies:A Discussion of the Views of Durkheimand of Hubertand Mauss."American Journal of Sociology 19(3):323-342. Lewis, Neil A. 2001. "Lobbying for Forgiveness." New YorkTimes, February25. Retrieved March 8, 2001 (http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/25/weekinreview/25LEWI.html). Inc. Merriam-Webster'sCollegiate Dictionary. 1993. 10th ed. Springfield,MA: Merriam-Webster, New YorkTimes. 2001. "ObliteratingHistory in Afghanistan." Editorial, March 3. Retrieved March 8, 2001 (http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/03/opinion/03SAT2.html). Newman, Maria.2001. "ZoningDispute Pits Monks Against Neighbors."New YorkTimes,March6. Retrieved March8, 2001 (http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/06/nyregion/06MONK.html). Niemeyer, Gerhart.1989. "TheRecovery of 'The Sacred'?"TheIntercollegiateReview 24(2):3-12. Otto, Rudolf. 1947. Das Heilige: iiber das Irrationalein der Idee des Gittlichen und sein VerhiiltniszumRationalen. Miinchen,Germany:Biederstein. 1976. TheIdea of the Holy: An InquiryInto the Non-RationalFactor in the Idea of the Divine and Its Relation to the Rational.Translatedby JohnW. Harvey.London,England:OxfordUniversityPress. OxfordEnglish Dictionary. 2nd ed. Vol. XIV. 1989. Oxford,England:ClarendonPress. Oxtoby,WillardGurdon.1973. "Holy (the Sacred)."In PhilipP. Wiener(ed.) Dictionaryof TheHistoryof Ideas: Studiesof Selected Pivotal Ideas, vol. II, pp. 511-514. New York:CharlesScribner'sSons. 1993. "Holy, Idea of the." In Mircea Eliade (ed). The Encyclopedia of Religion, vol. 5-6 (2 vols. in 1), pp. 431-438. New York:MacmillanPublishingCompany.

46

The Sacred PBS. 1999. "TheNotorious Hope Diamond."Partof the Treasuresof the WorldSeries. RetrievedMarch,2001 l/h5 debunking.html). (http://www.pbs.org/treasuresoftheworld/hope/hlevel Rehak, Melanie. 2001. "TheLife and Death and Life of PaulaFox: An UnexpectedLiteraryResurrection."New YorkTimes,March4. RetrievedMarch8, 2001 (http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/04/magazine/04PAULAFOX.html). Rennie, Bryan.2001a. "Re:The Sacredand the Profane."Personale-mail correspondencereceived by the author Nov. 14. 2001b. "Re:The Sacredand the ProfaneFollow-Up."Personale-mail correspondencereceived by the author Dec. 13. Ritzer, George. 1993. The McDonaldizationof Society: An InvestigationInto the Changing Characterof ContemporarySocial Life. ThousandOaks, CA: Pine Forge Press. Schmookler,AndrewBard. 1993. Fool's Gold: TheFate of Valuesin a Worldof Goods. San Francisco,CA: Harper San Francisco. Seidlitz, Larry,Alexis D. Abemethy, Paul R. Duberstein,James S. Evinger,TheresaH. Chang, and Bar'baraL. Lewis. 2002. "Developmentof the SpiritualTranscendenceIndex."Journalfor the Scientific Studyof Religion 41(3):439-453. Stark,Rodney.1965. "ATaxonomyof ReligiousExperience."Journalforthe ScientificStudyof Religion5:97-116. 2001. "ReconceptualizingReligion, Magic, and Science." Review of Religious Research43(2): 101-120. Stark,Rodney, and Roger Finke. 2000. Acts of Faith: Explaining the Human Side of Religion. Berkeley, CA: University of CaliforniaPress. Stark,Rodney,andWilliam Sims Bainbridge.1996. A Theoryof Religion. New Brunswick,NJ: RutgersUniversity Press. Stevenson, RichardW. 1999. "CandidatesOffer Varietyof Uses for Surplus."New YorkTimes, December 27. RetrievedMarch,2001 (http://www.nytimes.com/learning/students/pop/122799wh-surplus.html). Strauch, Barbara. 2001. "Seeing Kauai by Kayak." New YorkTimes, March 4. Retrieved March 8, 2001 (http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/04/travel/KAYAK.html). Swatos Jr.,William H. 1993. "Introduction."In William H. Swatos, Jr. (ed.) A Futurefor Religion? New Paradigmsfor Social Analysis, pp. ix-xviii. NewburyPark,CA: Sage Publications. Tucker,James. 2002. "ClaimingSacredGround:Pilgrims and Politics at Glastonburyand Sedona."Journalfor the ScientificStudyof Religion 41(3):595-596. Twiss, SumnerB., and WalterH. Conser,Jr.,eds. 1992. Experienceof the Sacred:Readings in the Phenomenology of Religion. Hanover,NH: Brown UniversityPress. Wrangham,RichardandDale Peterson.1996. DemonicMales: Apes and the Originsof HumanViolence.Boston, MA: MarinerBooks.

47