Eliade understands
syncretism not in a pejorative sense but as something inherent in culture and religion to influence each other.
Not exact matches
While I abhor the fundamentalists exaggerated political power in the USA (as uncharitable as that sounds) I can't warm to pseudo-Christian
syncretism either.
The issue was idolatry,
not science;
syncretism,
not natural history; theology,
not chronology; affirmation of faith in one transcendent God,
not creationist or evolutionist theories of origin.
It is
not philosophical
syncretism.
Besides,
syncretism is the term we use for the religion of those we do
not like.
All religions, especially an explicitly incarnational religion like Christianity, will
not be able to avoid cultural
syncretism.
The social motivations of
syncretism should
not be underestimated.
If this is
not an example of
syncretism, what is?
In 1975 there appeared in Germany a book entitled: The Berlin Ecumenical Manifesto, on the Utopian Vision of the World Council of Churches, edited by Walter Kunneth and Peter Beyerhaus.34 The book attacked
not only the World Council of Churches but also the Lutheran World Federation, World Student Christian Federation, certain Roman Catholic groups, the German Evangelical Kirchentag, Taize, and to some extent even Lausanne.35 According to H. Berkof, the common thread through all the articles in the book was the desire to demonstrate that the World Council of Churches no longer sought to proclaim the Gospel throughout the world, but strove rather for a purely horizontal, social and political, humanization and unification of mankind by means of religious pluralism and
syncretism.
In that case,
syncretism is defined by subjective intent,
not objective action.
For the record, I am in favor neither of
syncretism nor relativism,
not to mention idol worship.
«YAHWEH HATES
SYNCRETISM» (a) You don't know that.
Prior to the event, calls were going back and forth with Rome to make sure that what was said did
not compromise Catholic doctrine by religious
syncretism.
He makes the point that «structurally,
syncretism and synthesis are
not different from each other».
If this happened in the face of a victory as complete as Islam's over Arabia, how much more would such
syncretism take place when, as in Israel's case in Palestine, the Canaanites could
not be utterly conquered but, sustained and empowered, so current beliefs would suggest, by their native gods, lived on with the Israelites!
This initial division of function, however, could
not last;
syncretism was inevitable; alike in idea and custom, Yahweh borrowed from the baals and the baals, presumably, from Yahweh.
Church history teaches us that it was Rome that instituted this feast on this day; it is
syncretism at best, and the date was
not an arbitrary date chosen out of a hat.
I agree that Jesus was
not born on December 25, but we celebrate His birth on that day due to «
syncretism.»
Such a mission does
not lead to
syncretism and eclecticism but to «such growth in the essentials» as Asoka had demanded from the different religions, and that means nothing other than growth in love toward God and man.
Syncretism, however, is a temptation, because it seems at first glance
not to take anything away from Christianity, but only «to add a wider dimension to the faith of the Church.»
You can have Christianity or
syncretism, but you can
not have both.
I see the radical theologian as critic of all the new polytheisms and
syncretisms, as well as of the new archaisms (whether emerging from Hartford or any other life insurance center): standing like some latter - day Moses or Calvin before the unoccupied space once filled by the Christian God prohibiting re-entry by either demon or spirit) murmuring piously, «He is
not here; see the place where they laid him.»
Some people follow multiple religions or multiple religious principles at the same time, regardless of whether or
not the religious principles they follow traditionally allow for
syncretism.