The study of religious space, both physical and imagined, has advanced significantly in the past two decades, drawing upon theoretical perspectives and analytical methods from several fields, from anthropology and historical studies, to geography and architecture, to social and literary critical theory. Marking a path through this varied landscape of approaches, this essay presents a four-part taxonomy into which most can be classified. The categories discussed are (1) Structuralist-hermeneutical approaches, (2) Socio-historical approaches, (3) Critical-spatial theory and approaches, and (4) Critical-spatial approaches from within the study of religions. This taxonomy is intended to aid scholars in clarifying their approaches to religious spaces, both physical and imagined, and thus advance the study of this constitutive component of religion.

No abstract

No abstract

Abstract:The Park 51 controversy swept like wildfire through the media in late August of 2010, fueled by Islamophobes who oppose all advance of Islam in America. Yet the controversy also resonated with many who were clearly not caught up in the fear of Islam. This article attempts to understand the broader concern that the Park 51 project would somehow violate the Ground Zero site, and, thus, as a sign of "respect" should be moved to a different location, an argument that was invariably articulated in "spatial language" as groups debated the physical and spatial presence of the buildings in question, their relative proximity, and even the shadows they cast. This article focuses on three sets of spatial meanings that undergirded these arguments: the site as sacred ground created through trauma, rebuilding as retaliation for the attack, and the assertion of American civil religion. The article locates these meanings within a broader civic discussion of liberty and concludes that the spatialization of the controversy opened up discursive space for repressive, anti-democratic views to sway even those who believe in religious liberty, thus evidencing a deep ambivalence regarding the legitimate civic membership of Muslim Americans.

No abstract