Megan Howard

Landscapes of the Sacred Blog #2
The Ontological Approach immediately struck me as being the opposite of how a sacred place is conceived. It is more of an individualist experience and not a conceived notion passed from one generation to the next as a set part of a culture and or mythology. “Places in themselves are void of any intrinsic meaning and open to unlimited claims and counter-claims on (their) significance”(Lane 43) and should be perceived from an individualistic encounter. This is the heart of what a sacred place is.
Like the top of the mountain after a Native American spirit quest, at the end of the day to most it is still just a mountain. Although a culture may require us to respect a place and to believe in its spirituality to many it is still just a mountain, still just a hill where the story of a man is passed on. Although we do not have an intrinsic connection to this place and have never been there we still believe it holds great sacredness due to what our beliefs are. Our interaction with a place is crucial to it being called a “sacred place” and while we may believe it is holy it is only because of what we have been told and not from experience.