Understanding the Sacred

Three little recent events have synced in my mind now and formed an idea.

1. Many political people said that the Capitol building was "desecrated" during the Jan. 6 riot.

2. A friend, who posts stunning sunrise photos, asked if an unimpressive sunrise was any less holy than a glowing, orange one.

3. The daughter of the maker of the Lombardi trophy (Super Bowl) is upset that Tom Brady lightly tossed the trophy from his boat to another boat (quite close by), to his tight end. She wants an apology for the distress Brady caused by not properly respecting the trophy.

We long for sacred things in our lives -- a building, a sunrise, a trophy. What does "sacred" mean? Technically, it means the same as "holy" -- a term for something set apart for God, for use in His worship, His purpose, His will. Only something that is first set apart for God -- consecrated to Him -- can then be desecrated.

We can disagree about what is sacred, but not about what "sacred" means. It doesn't mean "beautiful," so my sunrise-photo friend can safely say that an unimpressive sunrise (is there such?) is as holy as the most beautiful one. In the Old Testament system, only the most pure, unblemished, perfectly-made things were dedicated to God's use -- kind of. God chose Israel, of all nations the most difficult, rebellious, complaining, and disobedient -- very imperfect. So He described them. In the end, it seems nothing is truly worthy of the term "sacred" except Jesus Christ Himself, and even He was humbled and made very low, given a fallen human body, before His sacrifice of Himself. He is holy. He was dedicated to God, and also perfectly pure.

We are told to be holy as He is. I struggle to wrap my mind around that.

Every time someone said that the Capitol building was desecrated, I twitched a little in discomfort. I agree wholeheartedly that we should treat such a building with deep respect and protection. But I don't believe it's sacred. It is set apart for a special use, yes, but not a spiritual one. The Capitol is for temporal, political use, not eternal, spiritual use. The same would go for the trophy, of course. Just because we greatly value something doesn't make it sacred, not even "sacred to me." There is no such thing. By definition, things are sacred to God.

The sunrises, however, I'm willing to consider as sacred, made by God, delighted in by Him, and used for His purposes. I wouldn't argue with that one.

Perhaps one of our greatest struggles now is misapplying that term, slapping "sacred" on anything we value. Forgetting God. Forgetting that we are asked to dedicate things to Him, in life -- taking something we value and cherish, and handing it over to Him for His use. If we consider something sacred, we must sacrifice it. Instead, we've generally twisted that idea, loving something and dedicating it to ourselves (as if we were God), and jealously attacking anybody who dares to lay a finger on it. I consider this kind of thinking as blasphemy.

I have decided on this position as I'm typing, which is rather scary. But I think it's true. I need to ask myself: When's the last time I took something I loved and said to God, "Here. This is for You. Not for me. Do with it as you wish; it's dedicated to You and no one else. I take my hands off."?

Which is, of course, what we are supposed to do with ourselves, with our lives. Maybe that's what Jesus meant when He said, "Be holy as I am holy."