Please note: the following article first appeared in a somewhat shorter version in
the Ephrata Review newspaper as a "Minister's Message" by me. It was inspired, in
part, by reflecting on the events of September 11, 2001.
Two locations. Two states. Two debates. One takes place in a sleepy little town nestled in the open fields and gently rolling hills of Pennsylvania. The other is centered in the heart of the concrete jungle known as Manhattan, New York. As different as night and day, both represent a similar question of "Sacred Ground".
Though it once was the sight of the most famous battle of the American Civil War, modern-day Gettysburg remains a nostalgic symbol of a day gone by. Yet a new battle is on the rise in this town, and it centers on a proposed casino within a half-mile of the Gettysburg National Military Park. Life in Lower Manhattan appears to always be contentious, at least to an outsider unaccustomed to big-city life. The newest point of contention these days involves a proposed Mosque on private land two blocks north of the location of the former World Trade Center towers, now known as Ground Zero.
While many issues are raised by both sides in defense of their positions, the common denominator is the definition of "Sacred Ground" as applied to places of national interest. The Miriam-Webster Thesaurus defines "sacred" as "1) not to be violated, criticized, or tampered with; 2)of, relating to, or being God; 3) of, relating to, or being used in the practice or worship services of a religion". It is the first definition that is typically associated with the term "sacred ground".
Casino opponents in Pennsylvania claim the proposed project there would cheapen the hallowed battlefield and the memory of the fallen soldiers. Those who oppose the Mosque in New York use similar arguments in defense of those who died in the September 11, 2001 attack by linking the Religion of Islam with the terrorists responsible for that tragedy.
This article is not intended to address the merits of either position. However, after reading articles about both in the same newspaper on the same day recently I became intrigued with the whole concept of "Sacred Ground". For no matter where you stand on these divisive issues the definition of sacred ground eventually comes into play. In search of a clearer understanding from a Christian perspective I turned to my Bible. There I discovered that the term "sacred ground" does not exist. I did, however, find the term "holy ground" used on two occasions: once in the Old Testament and once in the New, where the former was quoted. The reference is found in Exodus 3:5 when God spoke to Moses through the burning bush: “Do not come any closer,” God said. “Take off your sandals, for the place where you are standing is holy ground.”
Of course the ancient land of Canaan has long been considered sacred to the descendants of Abraham. Through the centuries wars have been fought over it in nearly every generation, or so it seems. There is nothing new in this. Neither is there anything new in setting aside a small tract of land for a place of worship, thereby consecrating the tract as "sacred". For the Israelites of the Old Testament there was Mount Sinai, Shiloh, and Mount Zion within the city of Jerusalem. It was here on Mount Zion that the tabernacle tent was replaced with the Temple built by Solomon.
Understandably such sights evoke passionate responses from people. Yet I find myself asking: why? Why do we place such a high priority on land? Why are we willing to fight - even die - for the land we claim to be ours? In reality it does not belong to us. Our tax receipts, titles, deeds and supporting legal documents mean nothing in the cosmic scheme of things. The Bible is unmistakably clear: "The earth is the Lord's and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it. (Psalm 24:1)". It is true that the Old Covenant included the promise of land to Abraham and his descendants, but as Christians we live under a New Covenant established by Jesus Christ. Interestingly he was asked a similar question one day by a Samaritan woman while sitting at a well. In John 4:1-26 the woman engages Jesus by asking where the proper place of worship is: Mount Gerizim, as held by the Samaritans, or Jerusalem, as practiced by the Jews.
Jesus' response is insightful: "Jesus declared, 'Believe me, woman, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem...a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth.”
Our Lord teaches that temporal things, including land, belong by nature to the physical realm, to the "powers of this dark world (Ephesians 6:12)" and are not to be considered in the Kingdom of God. For God's realm is spiritual in nature. It is a kingdom that is not of this world (John 18:36). Rather, it is housed within the heart of the believer.
For those who are in Christ, then, the term "Sacred Ground" is meant to apply to what the author of Hebrews calls "the city whose architect and builder is God. (Hebrews 11:10)", that is, heaven. Thus informed by scripture we find that our priorities are fashioned by maintaining a proper perspective on life. We are sojourners and strangers in this world (Hebrews 11:9). Why then do we place such an emphasis on protecting our territory? Moreover, why should we attempt to consecrate any portion of this life as "sacred"? Whether battlegrounds or casinos, sanctuaries of worship or centers of destruction, it will all come under the judgment of the One who says "The old order of things has passed away...Behold, I make all things new! (Revelation 21:4-5)". Until that great day arrives and our Lord Jesus returns let us pray earnestly for the wisdom and the grace to know and to do His Will.
G. D. Gehr
No comments:
Post a Comment