Final Summary of my Israel Journey(s)!
I’ve finished writing the 5 small papers and the final larger paper for my class. Not surprisingly, I can’t figure out how to upload them here as I thought this would be an appropriate place for them….so, I will cut/paste below my final paper and at least I will have that record of how this trip moved and inspired me!
Lila Robinson RLGN 392 Sacred Spaces Independent Studies Final Paper
Touring Israel – A mostly Catholic Interfaith Tour
As a Reformed Jew traveling with my Rabbi on a predominantly Catholic Interfaith Tour of Israel, I have a strangely skewed view and memory of this journey of sacred spaces. Coupled with my first trip to Israel, two years earlier, where all of the 20 plus travelers were Jewish (mostly from a Jewish Seminary for Rabbis and cantorial soloists), I have a unique opportunity to add this experience into comparisons of sacred spaces visited in Israel this July, 2014. For purposes of this paper, I hope to show differences and similarities of various sacred spaces visited and compare and contrast how these spaces came to be viewed as sacred as well as how this may have developed or changed over time.
To begin with, until I started writing this paper, it hadn’t occurred to me that we had not really visited Temples or Synagogues on either trip, except for a service I attended inside of the UAHC that was voluntary on a Shabbat morning two years ago and a quick stop-in visit to one very small synagogue in Tsva’at as well. Considering that this year’s trip involved churches and chapels built on nearly each of the sacred Catholic sites, I am now finding this to be interesting and thought-provoking.
So for me, the most obvious contrast between the predominantly Jewish sacred sites and the predominantly Catholic sacred sites, bearing in mind that there is some cross-over amongst these, is that most of the Jewish spaces did not require the building and/or rebuilding of a specific prayer space, i.e. synagogue or chapel. It seems to me that there is much more “uncovering” and archeology ongoing at the Jewish sites without the need to create a new or separate chapel or synagogue, even when some of these spaces are used for prayer and meditation either beforehand or afterwards. Exceptions to this would be King David’s tomb and the Kotel. King David’s tomb is divided by a screening and wall in the middle right up to the sarcophagus for the express purpose of creating and dividing separate prayer spaces for men and women. The Kotel is similarly divided but the stone of the wall is its own prayer center and not enhanced with religious objects or paraphernalia except off to the sides where people can obtain study materials to enhance their experience.
Regardless of whether the sites are primarily Jewish or Catholic , or even shared with other religions as sacred space, it is very interesting to note that once a site is deemed sacred, even with layers and years of destruction, rebuilding and ownership changes, it does not seem to shake the sacredness to its believers. A ready example of this is the shared space of King David’s Tomb and the Coenaculum. The Coenaculum is revered as the place of the Last Supper. It is the upper room, which is traditional for a space and supper such as this to take place. The tomb of King David occupies the lower level of this same space. Currently, the two spaces are shared as sacred space by Jews and Catholics alike. But, historically this space shares a number of iterations and ownership. In the mid 1500’s the entire space was turned into a Mosque. Many sacred spaces in Israel have a shared history of varied religious spaces and layers of build-up and destruction and rebuilding from many differing time periods and uses.
The plaza outside of the Kotel has previously been homes to people from many backgrounds; most recently it was a Palestinian neighborhood that was destroyed by bombings during warfare and then bulldozed eventually to create the plaza leading to the prayer sections of the Wall. This has not marred the religious sacredness of the Kotel, and indeed, the rather modern-looking plaza has done nothing to decrease the attraction to this sacred place.
The Kotel, or Western Wall, is a most holy and sacred site for Jews worldwide. It is easily explained at the website “thekotel.org”:
“The Second Temple was destroyed in the year 70 CE. Despite the destruction that took place, all four Temple Mount support walls remained standing. Throughout the generations since the Temple’s destruction, the Western Wall was the remnant closest to the site of the Temple’s Holy of Holies that was accessible to Jews. Therefore, it became a place of prayer and yearning for Jews around the world. When Jews expressed their longing for Jerusalem through song, Judaica, jewelry, and prayer, the image of Jerusalem was conveyed via the image of the Western Wall.”
I was quite surprised on this most recent trip when our Catholic travel-mates were so excited to pray at the Kotel. I had just assumed that only Jews prayed there. It didn’t occur to me until this trip that for Catholics, and I presume for many other Christians, it is an important honor and practice to pray or be where Jesus prayed or had been. As a Religious Studies major, I am fascinated and enthralled with places of worship and sacredness outside of my personal religious affiliation, so I am uncertain why this surprised me as it did. In analyzing the situation further, I believe it is because I have associated the Kotel with my personal religious beliefs and not looked at it outside of that in any of my studies.
Religion as a course of study is very different than religious affiliation or belief. There is a removal from the deeper and possibly more sacred sense of things when you are studying religion as a discipline as opposed to studying for your personal religious fulfillment. While I cannot completely remove my “Jewishness” from an analysis of peoples’ visit to the Kotel, I think that I can fairly analyze and understand why non-Jews could come to the Kotel and still find it sacred and a place of prayer. My first thoughts were that non-Jews, or more specifically Christians, would come to the Kotel to see or walk or pray where Jesus went. I think it is true in most cases. But I also believe it can be for deeper connections than that. If Christians can come here and stand at the Wall, and somehow get into the same spiritual place inside of themselves as Jesus did, then they would have a deeper connection to Jesus during his lifetime and what he felt and believed and how he came to fulfill his role in their religious beliefs. This connection is much deeper than simply “walking where Jesus has walked” which is so often described in pilgrimage trip goals. It requires deep spiritual meditation and concentration and fulfills a religious epiphany of a personal nature. In this way, the Kotel, is more easily understood as a “sacred space” for Christians as well as Jews.
The greater area of the Kotel, the Temple Mount, brings with it a much deeper and vaster sacredness. The Dome of the Rock, which is stands proudly beside and above the Kotel, is an extremely sacred place and also a place of great controversy. The Dome is actually a Muslim Shrine, not a Mosque, and is controlled by the Muslim Council. But the Rock referred to in its name is actually considered sacred to all three of the Abrahamic religions. Jews believe this rock was where Abraham came to sacrifice is son Isaac before God and also was the very place in both the 1st and 2nd Temple where the Holy of Holies was. The Ark of the Covenant, contained in the Holy of Holies, is said to contain the 10 commandments provided by Moses and was built by specifications Moses received from God. This is an over-simplified explanation; however, for purposes of this paper, it is important to note that this Holy of Holies and the Ark of the Covenant it was said to contain were so sacred only the highest of Priests could go in there and only on Yom Kippur. It was in the inner most area of The Temple. And this is believed to be the same place as the Dome of the Rock currently sits. For Christians, the sacredness of this place is for those same reasons and, more specifically, because of what they meant in the life and spirituality of Jesus and where they believe end-of-time happenings will take place, beginning with some rebuilding of the temple. For Muslims, they believe, first of all, that Abraham’s son Ishmael was the one taken here to be sacrificed. But, more importantly, they believe it is the place where Mohammed ascended to heaven. The shrine is only visited by Muslims and under great scrutiny. It is, obviously, extremely sacred and, regardless of the differing stances on its sacredness and sacred history, the Dome sets high with glory atop all views of Jerusalem. It commands reverence and respect and is basically left to that. My initial thoughts on this would be that most Jews would have been forbidden from going there if it were still in existence today as the home to the Ark of the Covenant (as only Priests were allowed to enter once a year), so could this be why it sits at rest from attack and ruin? I don’t have the answer to this question, but I assume this plays into it.
During this most recent visit to Israel, and over recent visits to various Catholic churches, I have become enthralled by the depictions of the Stations of the Cross. My first impression was that this devotional practice of praying at each station was so opposed to Jewish prayer practices and even to what I perceived as devotion to Jesus in Christianity and Catholicism as I understood it. However, I have come to realize that the praying that happens at the wall hanging of the Stations of the Cross in Catholic churches is not simply some sort of idol worship as it originally seemed to me, but is meant as a means to help bring the individual’s prayer closer to the last hours of Jesus’s life on earth and of the pain and suffering he was willing to endure in fulfillment of preparing the path to salvation through his sacrifice. I had suspected that the ability to walk the actual “Stations of the Cross” in Israel would be an incredibly moving and sacred experience. And, in certain places, it was a very solemn and spiritual experience. In other places, the mere number on a small plaque or sign, were underwhelming at best! But, then again, these were places where Jesus walked and fell and/or dropped the cross he was carrying and, long since have been overtaken by more modern and current living structures. Reflection upon these helps to understand why a second set, a more biblical set of “Stations of the Cross” have been developed to more closely relate prayers and devotions to the scriptures. The mixture of sacred and profane on the Via Delorosa can be unsettling, however, when you’re on a pilgrimage tour, the profane, or modern intrusion, to your quest, is easily and quickly overlooked as you venture forward to find the different and more sacred of the stations.
The final 5 Stations of the Cross are all located in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. This site is not only sacred but is overwhelming and is a living example of controversy and/or lack of cooperation between differing Christian religions and their claim to sacred space. The contrast to this could easily be the Church of All Nations which is a much more recent structure at the Gardens of Gethsemane. The Church of the Holy Sepulchre, is also called the Church of the Resurrection. Most Christians consider this as where Jesus spent his final hours of life, died on the cross, was prepared for burial, was buried and ascended into heaven. Entrance to the courtyard of the church is through a small door0way sized opening immediately at the end of a long trail of shops and kiosks and market stalls. A decaying ladder displays before you at a second story window area, looking very non-religious and completely out of place. However, the story (or stories) behind the ladder help confirm the issues of division in Christianity. Due to the joint claims of ownership culminating in a collection of large and small chapels representing many Christian sects, the ladder was supposedly used by a Mason performing repairs and when rights to use of space was disputed, it culminated in no one being allowed to move the ladder and there is stands to this day. When you enter inside of the Church, you witness the central shared space containing a large slab known as the anointing stone where Jesus is said to have been prepared for burial. Pilgrims place their souvenirs upon the stone and pray and are hopeful they are receiving blessing. Looking further to try and verify the nature of this stone, conflicting reports demonstrate clearly that this is probably not the actual stone at all. However, even knowing this would, in my opinion, change little in how people perceived or prayed and contemplated this sacred spot. On the wall behind this stone is a beautifully preserved mosaic depicting the act of preparing Jesus for burial. These two beautiful features sit perfectly beside one another and are appreciated by all. Beyond this, however, is where the greater nature of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre takes place. The multitude of chapels and churches belonging to different Christian denominations speak volumes to the great division in theology, dogma and practice that still exists in Christianity. Some of these spaces look extremely similar and others, look completely different in ornate vs. empty contrast. They do survive and coexist in a peaceful and practical manner and, I imagine if we had been there during more ceremonial times, we could have experienced bigger differences. As it turned out, we ended up staying for Catholic services in Italian in a very small, but not untypical Roman Catholic Church. The services were two-fold, the first being a procession and benediction of the “host” followed moments later by a Catholic mass. Even with the mass being presented in Italian, the familiarity with the ceremony in English made it simple enough to follow.
As I stated earlier, the contrast to the divisions of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre is best demonstrated at the Church of All Nations in the Gardens of Gethesmane. It is also called the Basilica of Agony. Directly above the Gardens of Gethesmane is the Mount of Olives, overlooking all of Jerusalem. The gardens are where Jesus often prayed and where he was betrayed and captured and arrested by the Romans. At the front and center of the church is exposed rock where Jesus is said to have prayed. This newer building was building was completed in 1924 and was built with funds and cooperation of many countries. Our guide told us prior to entering (there is no speaking aside from prayer while inside) to look up to the ceiling at a series of domes with symbolism from each of the countries who donated to support the construction. And just outside the church, within the gardens, is an open alter shared by many Christian sects for prayer and worship. Mosaics from the prior Byzantine church were uncovered during construction the architect, a Franciscan Monk from Italy named Antonio Barluzzi, halted construction and reworked the planning to incorporate glass flooring to preserve the mosaics. Antonio Barluzzi designed many Holy Land churches. The Church of All Nations is maintained by the Franciscan Holy Land Trust but is a true testament to coexistence.
Another take-away from this interfaith trip was the ability to clearly see the difference between “sacred” and “profane” and to see how they can so easily become one or the other depending on your reason for being there.
According to Merriam-Webster.com, the definitions of sacred and profane are:
PROFANE
1 : having or showing disrespect for religious things
- profanelanguage
2 : relating to ordinary life : not religious or spiritual : secular
- sacred and profanecustoms
– – – – – – – – –
SACRED
1 : worthy of religious worship : very holy
a sacred shrine
The burial site is sacred ground.
the sacred image of the Virgin Mary
— often + to
The shrine is sacred to millions of worshippers.
2 : relating to religion
sacred scriptures/songs/texts
3 : highly valued and important : deserving great respect
the sacred pursuit of liberty
We have a sacred duty to find out the truth.
Freedom is a sacred right
A whole litany of research can be completed on sacred vs. profane in Israel, however, what is important to this paper is the contrast no in sacred to profane, but in how the profane can quickly be seen and experienced as sacred without anything changing but the person perceiving it.
We visited several sites where John the Baptist and Jesus and his disciples were said to have been baptized in the Jordan River. With little or no enhancement other than an occasional plaque, most of these sites, and the Jordan River for that matter, seemed rather ordinary, bordering on the profane mostly because the Jordan River is a more like a muddy creek at most points. However, one of my protestant travel mates, donning a wrapped head scarf and cinching up her skirt to above her knee, then waded into the dirty muddy waters, and, even for me a non-Christian, I could see and experience a sense of this sacred space. This was unexpected and amazing at the same time. When I mentioned this is an email to my Rabbi and to Prof. Zeni Fox some weeks later, I got this response from Rabbi Lader:
“I felt the same way you did when we walked to the Jordan River — and then when Videth picked up her skirt and waded in, I saw how meaningful it was to her. For me, this was a very important part of our trip — for each of us to see the sacred through another’s eyes. How special is that!”
In Translation of Sacred-profane dichotomy in English at: translation.babylon.com, I read the below statement:
“French sociologist Émile Durkheim considered the dichotomy between the sacred and the profane to be the central characteristic of religion: “religion is a unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things, that is to say, things set apart and forbidden.” In Durkheim’s theory, the sacred represented the interests of the group, especially unity, which were embodied in sacred group symbols, or totems. The profane, on the other hand, involved mundane individual concerns. Durkheim explicitly stated that the dichotomy sacred/profane was not equivalent to good/evil. The sacred could be good or evil, and the profane could be either as well. “
I think what I learned most from this trip, was that sacred places, sacred spaces and sacred experiences are unique not only to each individual or journey, but to the time and place and opportunity they are presented. Sharing the two trips with people of varying ages and depths of religious beliefs, I learned to appreciate and acknowledge that sacred and profane, as well as coexistence can possibly reside in the exact same place.
lilatov 