A THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL XLIV 2002 Published by the Protestant ...

IVANA NOBLE (DOLEJäOV¡)
In discussing questions of secularisation, as we do in various ways
in this issue, it strikes me that this concept of the profanum, or the
profane, is well worth considering. For the way in which we categorise
this space outside of the specifically religious, but still inextricably
linked to it, will determine how we view the concept of secularisation,
and whether we find it useful. It can also force us to
recognise the liminal experiences, those which happen in the doorway
between the temple and the space outside.
The profane, in Christian terms the extra-ecclesial space, can be
seen either as fundamentally distinct from the ecclesial space, and
therefore opposed to it, or it can be regarded as a continuation of the
ecclesial space, or perhaps less aggressively, as deeply linked to it. In
the first instance, secularisation is generally seen as a threat, as an
attack of the ìworld outsideî on the ìworld insideî the presence of
God. In my earlier metaphor, the cathedral is flooded with a vision,
that when it sinks, the city will be free. Secularisation, in this understanding,
turns the demonic faces from facing outwards to facing
inside the temple. They become rationalised, but not relieved of their
powers. Thus, the space ìout thereî is a threat to all who are ìinsideî,
or at least a series of temptations, or at best pragmatic negotiations
we have to make to get through the throng to take our seats in the
house of God. This may be something of the attitude of Paul, as
exemplified, for example, in Corinthians, where the outside world is
recognised, and not exactly condemned, but treated as a necessary
background noise to the attempts of the body to live in holiness.
In this situation, there tends to be a deep distrust of all that comes
from outside, and it tends to be viewed as potentially threatening.
Whereas a ìhermeneutic of suspicionî may have a role to play here, a
sense of permanent suspicion is essentially destructive, since it allows
for no growth or development. Of course, suspicion of the outsider
is not exactly peculiar to the church ñ as analysts of the present
phobias of Euro-American society, such as Lyotard, Levinas or Metz,
remind us. But within Christianity, it is doubly problematic, since it
seems to run counter to commandments about caring for the needy,
for the outcast, even for oneís enemies, and to the basic tenet of the
Jewish and Christian traditions (at least a significant part of Christian
tradition) that the world is created good. Hence the other tendency, to
222