Beyond the Sacred

Thanks to Steve Zara for the link.


I gave a talk called ‘Beyond the sacred’, on the changing character of ideas of the sacred and of blasphemy, at a conference on blasphemy organised this weekend by the Centre for Inquiry at London’s Conway Hall on Saturday. Here is a transcript.

alt text

To talk about blasphemy is also to talk about the idea of the sacred. To see something as blasphemous is to see it in some way as violating a sacred space. In recent years, both the notion of blasphemy and that of the sacred have transformed. What I want to explore here is the nature of that transformation, and what it means for free speech.

For believers, the idea of the sacred is key to moral life. Detachment from the sacred, the former Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Cormac Murphy O’Connor claimed at the installation ceremony for his successor, Archbishop Vincent Nicholls, has been responsible for war and terror, sin and evil. In this view the acceptance of the sacred is indispensable for the creation of a moral framework and for the injection of meaning and purpose into life.

I don’t want to get into a discussion here about the relationship between religion and morality. As an atheist, I do not see myself as lacking a moral compass, or being unaware of boundaries, or being burdened by a sense of a purposeless life. What I do want to do is look more carefully at what we mean by the ‘sacred’. Religion, Leszek Kolokowski, the Polish Marxist-turned-Christian philosopher, acknowledged, ‘is man’s way of accepting life as inevitable defeat’. ‘To reject the sacred is’, as he puts it, ‘to reject our own limits.’ In this Tragic view of the human condition, the sacred exists to protect human beings from the flaws of their own nature. ‘The sacred order’, as Kolokowski observes, ‘has never ceased, implicitly or explicitly, to proclaim “this is how things are, they cannot be otherwise”.’

The sacred, in this sense, is less about the transcendent than it is about the taboo. The sacred sphere, as French sociologist Émile Durkheim pointed out a century ago, constitutes a social space that is set apart and protected from being defiled: a set of rules and practices that cannot be challenged. It provides a means of protecting not the kingdom of heaven but the citadels of earthly power. The sacred, Kolakowski observes, ‘simply reaffirms and stabilizes the structure of society – its forms and its systems of divisions, and also its injustices, its privileges and its institutionalized instruments of oppression.’ Blasphemy, and the sacred, in other words, are not simply about theology and religion, but also about politics and power. We can see the way that blasphemy and the sacred have helped speak to social and political power if we look at the history of blasphemy in Britain.

Read on

TAGGED: BLASPHEMY, POLITICS, RELIGION, SOCIETY


RELATED CONTENT

A Year After the Non-Apocalypse: Where...

Tom Bartlett - Religion Dispatches 32 Comments

A reporter tracks down the remnants of Harold Camping’s apocalyptic movement and finds out you don’t have to be crazy to believe something nuts.

Dolan: White House is “strangling”...

- - Preserve Religious Freedom -... 51 Comments

Dolan: White House is “strangling” Catholic church

Moral Clarity and Richard Dawkins

Carson - Reasons for God 91 Comments

What kind of meta-ethical foundation has Dawkins provided for his ‘moral home’?

"Faith: Pretending to know things you...

Dr. Peter Boghossian - YouTube -... 62 Comments

"Faith: Pretending to know things you don't know"

Debate: Can Atheists and Believers work...

-- - Rationalist Society of Australia 73 Comments

A debate between Chris Stedman, PZ Myers, and Leslie Cannold from April 15, 2012.

Mencken week: Day 2

Jerry Coyne - Why Evolution Is True 11 Comments

MORE

MORE BY KENAN MALIK

To name the unnameable

Kenan Malik - Pandaemonium 15 Comments

But in the real world where societies are plural, then it is both inevitable and important that people offend the sensibilities of others. Inevitable, because where different beliefs are deeply held, clashes are unavoidable. And we should deal with those clashes rather than suppress them. Important because any kind of social change or social progress means offending some deeply held sensibilities. The right to ‘subject each others’ fundamental beliefs to criticism’ is the bedrock of an open, diverse society.

Non-believers can be bigoted too

Kenan Malik 50 Comments

MORE

Comments

Comment RSS Feed

Please sign in or register to comment