Some museums are restricting access to certain artificats, in accord with religious sensibilities

At the British Museum, founded as the home for Enlightenment values, Ethiopian tabots are wrapped in cloth and hidden in the basement. Curators, conservators and even the director of the museum, Neil McGregor, cannot look at the 11 wooden tablets regarded by Ethiopian Christians as representing the original Ark of the Covenant. Only priests are permitted entry into the locked room. Jonathan Williams, international adviser at the British Museum, defends the hiding of the tablets, telling me the move "contributes to increased public accessibility". He explains: "Before, we were not informed properly of their [the tablets’] meaning. Now we are better informed, we know who can, and cannot, see them." This, in his eyes, means that we know much more about them. However, the decision could confuse understanding religious ritual with the practice of it.

Curators will not display part of the collection at the Hancock Museum in Newcastle. Behind closed doors, they have separated parts of this hidden trove into segregated boxes. Only men may look at the set of churinga totems, given to young men of the Arrernte tribe in Australia when they became adults. Any female researchers who make a special request to examine the material will be "actively discouraged".

Increasingly, museums and galleries are considering the sacredness of all collections. Curators for the sacred silver and stained-glass galleries, opening this November at the Victoria and Albert Museum in London, consulted with faith groups. On their advice, the collection of silver Christian artefacts was arranged separately from Judaica. Although access will not be restricted, the objects are displayed with "guidance" from believers.

An interesting discussion, touched on here before. It’s tricky territory, given the proportion of ancient artifacts that are sacred in origin. Me, I’d be happy if museums just took saints’ relics off display. Some museums are sensitive about this, but I’ve been in some – I’m pretty sure the Cleveland Art Museum comes to mind – that aren’t. I’ve also always thought that was partly the local Church’s responsibility as well, to keep tabs on such things. But of course, too many local Churches would gladly hand over all of their relics to a museum rather than actually display them themselves.

The broader issue is the purpose and the existence of the museum at all. Must everything be displayed in a museum or archival collection, even if the purpose is study, rather than simply exhibition? No. The museum is a modern (relatively) invention, and not necessary to human existence. The world would not change orbit if deeply sacred objects were removed from museums and returned to the religious communities to whom they are sacred.

In fact, if that happened…the world might just unwobble and inch a bit closer to its proper orbit.

Religion taken out of museum displays and brought back to be touched and used by living faith communities?

Hang on. There’s a blockbuster exhibition for you.