A few years back, my oldest daughter told me about a podcast she’d discovered called Harry Potter and the Sacred Text. Hosted by Vanessa Zoltan and Casper Ter Kuile, each episode analyzed a single chapter from one of the books using poignant themes like loneliness, compassion, advocacy, etc. They were determined to show that you can treat secular things as if they are sacred.
From June 2016 through March 2021, the two of them read, interpreted, and exegeted every chapter of every book. They offered creative ways to look at the text, invited easy-to-apply practices (marginalia, florilegia, PaRDeS, lectio divina, to name only a few), and helped us become better people along the way. Then, in April 2021, Vanessa started over, this time with a new cohost and a commitment to “re-examine the whole Harry Potter series again from the beginning with even more rigor, demonstrating that loving a text responsibly means acknowledging the places where it falls short.” [Source] (Oh, how I love this last phrase . . . and could not possibly agree more!)
I wish I could say I have listened to every episode vs. only the first season. I have meant to go back and pick up where I left off, but it still has not happened.1 Nevertheless, Zoltan and Ter Kuile’s beautiful sacredizing of what most would consider secular has kept me in its grip . . . its embrace, really.
I grew up with the not-to-be-questioned belief that only one Text was to be called sacred; only one Text was worthy (and demanding) of my time, attention, devotion, and obedience. Whether because I am an oldest child or an Enneagram 3, perfection and excellence and proving myself were paramount where this Text was concerned. I read it, over and over again. I underlined. I copied whole sections into organized notebooks. I memorized. I undoubtedly read more books about it than the Text itself had pages. And I did everything in my power to live according to its teachings. Honestly: it was exhausting! I’d like to say that I did become a better person along the way, but not without cost.
What is the cost of viewing the sacred as something nearly unattainable but requiring our endless pursuit? What is the cost of determining one’s worthiness through a lens of self-sacrifice, sin, and the pursuit of perfection? What is the cost of believing the sacred to be something transcendent as opposed to a way of being that honors the everyday and the ordinary? I’m still counting those costs, to be sure: undoing them, deconstructing them, healing them.
It took me decades to even obliquely consider the possibility that the sacred was mine to define and discern, to experience and express, let alone be discovered outside the narrow and prescriptive path I’d been committed to walking. But once I began to see other ways of understanding the sacred, I couldn’t un-see. Thankfully.
It’s helpful to acknowledge the most common definition of “sacred:” The Oxford dictionary says it means being connected with God (or the gods) or dedicated to a religious purpose and so deserving veneration. Synonyms are holy, hallowed, consecrated, sanctified, revered. It assumes “religious” rather than secular and it usually embodies the laws or doctrines of a religion.
It’s no wonder this eludes our grasp, even our experience!
I prefer Vanessa Zoltan’s definition, instead:
“[The sacred is] something that you are in an intentional relationship with that gets you better at loving.”
This is worth reading again. (Go ahead: I’ll wait for you.)
It’s also worth pondering.
What are the things (people, activities, habits) with which you are in intentional relationship? Do they get you better at loving? What memories do you have of the sacred that expanded your way of being in the world, that invited you to more compassion (for self and others), that increased your capacity to love? If you were to adopt this distinct definition of “sacred,” with what might you choose to be in relationship?
These questions open up whole worlds of worship, really; vast realms of awe and wonder; room to move and explore and broaden our understanding and experience of the sacred. Which, it seems to me, is the very point of any kind of spirituality: more, deeper, wider, open, inclusive, expansive.
Sadly, we’ve been plagued for centuries by smaller and smaller allowances of the same. Denominations. Doctrines. Dogma. Smaller still, are the ways in which these very things now segment us from one another; they create us/them divisions with increasingly loud agendas: how we vote and for whom, who is allowed rights or even considered “sacred” in the first place, how much freedom particular people (women, specifically) have to make choices for themselves. . . .
As the collective mind narrows, it’s not all that surprising that we struggle to find the sacred in much of anything. We desperately need a new understanding, a new way forward, and for sure, anything that helps us get better at loving. Even if it’s Harry Potter . . . or Jane Eyre.
In 2021, Vanessa Zoltan wrote a book called Praying with Jane Eyre: Reflections on Reading as Sacred Practice. She used many of the same premises applied to the Harry Potter podcast, but this time with a literary classic (that I happen to love). Within it she says this:
Sacredness is an act, not a thing. If I can decide that Jane Eyre is sacred, that means it is the actions I take that will make it so. The decision to treat Jane as sacred is an important first step, surely, but that is all the decision was—one step. The ritual, the engagement with the thing, is what makes the thing sacred. . . . The text did not determine the sacredness; the actions and actors did, the questions you asked of the text and the way you returned to it.
That’s worth reading again. (Go ahead: I’ll wait for you.)
Ascribing sacredness to something is not from “on high” or only reserved for chosen texts, people, or even deities. Instead, our decisions, our choices, our actions and engagement are what make it so.
And because this is the case, it opens us up to profound levels of possibility and grace. When the sacred is not a “thing,” but something we do—not a noun, rather, a verb—then nearly anything can qualify. Yes, reading a text. But also walking in nature, baking cookies, playing with your kids, writing for self and/or others, rearranging furniture, meditating, doing water aerobics, even watching a movie.
I’ve re-watched You’ve Got Mail many, many times. But it represents so much more to me than just a movie now, because I’ve made it more meaningful. I have very specific rituals for when and how to watch (always alone, always with a tub of Pralines and Cream Häagen-Dazs ice cream). It’s not an “Oh, what shall we watch?” kind of movie; it’s an “I’m feeling lost and alone, and I need everything I’ve got to bring me out of this slump” kind of movie. Certain lines are inscribed on my heart, like mantras. Characters are totems of how I want to be—or not be—in the world. While for most people it’s just another rom-com, for me, You’ve Got Mail is sacred. ~ Casper Ter Kuile, The Power of Ritual: Turning Everyday Activities into Soulful Practices
In other words (and said yet again), we get to decide what we deem sacred, what we will read and ponder and reflect on again and again, where we will find meaning (and what ice cream flavor best compliments such), and the endless ways in which all of this and then some invites us to become a better person along the way; to get better at loving.
Honestly, I could write about this topic for a very long time (and, of course, in many ways, I have been). But for now, let me make one last point. Better said, let Vanessa Zoltan make one last point—again from Praying with Jane Eyre:
My thesis in this experiment was not that Jane Eyre was sacred in and of itself but that if I treated something as sacred, it could be sacred. My trust was in my ability to treat something as sacred and for it to teach me if I did so.
Mmmmm. This feels like perfect prayer and benediction, yes?
May we act and engage in ways that treat things (and certainly each other) as sacred, because they are.