The Big Tent "Syncretism" by Roger Doebke

THE BIG TENT

SYNCRETIC adjective: characterized or brought about by a combination of different forms of belief or practice

SYNCRETISM noun: the combining of di erent religions, cultures, or ideas

BY ROGER DOEBKE

PREFACE This pamphlet is a compilation of materials in the public domain and my own thoughts. The purpose of the pamphlet is to educate and provide a basis for discussion amongst people who have an interest in better de ning their spiritual path. Unitarian Universalists have a history of attracting people who have spent much of their life growing up in a religious or secular household, the basis of which no longer ts them. However, past experiences don’t disappear, they are part of who we are, what we believe, or don’t believe, and how we engage the world. As we move into new territory we bring all of our past with us even if we would like to forget it. Whatever we learn and incorporate into our lives in the new territory will be mixed with what is already within us. There will be a combining of the old with the new. This is syncretism. Even though you have left where you grew up there are aspects of that experience that you may still yearn for, such as the music or ritual or holiday festivities. You might choose to attend services of your childhood tradition or even ask that a service be performed for you by cler y of that former a liation. In some cases cler y will perform services for una liated persons, however, don’t be surprised if you are unwelcome at your previous a liation. As will be discussed later, syncretism is considered a watering down of their religion by many and a threat to an absolute truth by some.

ffi

Roger Doebke

RELIGIOUS SYNCRETISM Syncretism is a tricky term. Its main di culty is that it is used with both an objective and a subjective meaning. The basic objective meaning refers neutrally and descriptively to the mixing of religions. The subjective meaning includes an evaluation of such intermingling from the point of view of one of the religions involved. As a rule, the mixing of religions is condemned in this evaluation as violating the essence of the belief system. Yet, as we will see, a positive subjective de nition also belongs to the possibilities. This confusion of meanings has motivated scholars to propose the abolition of the term. Yet, the term is so widely used that even a scholarly consensus to do away with it would not lead to a general moratorium on its use. Its abandonment is the more improbable when one considers that the number of contacts between believers of di erent religions increases daily, and with that, the phenomenon referred to by the term ‘syncretism’, also increases. In the discussion on inter- religious dialogue the term would continue to be used in any case, particularly by those who are opposed to such an endeavor and who constantly warn against the danger of syncretism (in the negative subjective sense). Moreover, those seeking religious contextualization may use it in a positive and sometimes almost proud and de ant sense, especially in concrete situations in the Third World.1

ffi

1 https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110259513.195/pdf

It wasn’t until the early 20th century in Christian missionary circles that the word became clearly negative. At this point, White Christians began learning about religious practices in other parts of the world, in part through correspondence with European missionaries. As Christianity spread rapidly, missionaries and theologians began worrying that Christianity could get polluted by non-European in uences. They started calling supposedly diluted forms of Christianity syncretism.2 These interpretations show that syncretism has had a positive and negative reputation among members of cultural and religious communities. Some people view those who join syncretic communities as being unfaithful or wayward members of their original communities.

Syncretism and Fundamentalism In various senses syncretism and fundamentalism are opposites. Whereas syncretism uses more than one religious source, fundamentalism defends the uniqueness of the one source, often codi ed in a sacred text. Syncretism implies that more versions of the experience with the sacred are acceptable and can be combined, whereas fundamentalists defend one exclusive version. Syncretists experiment with religious symbols, as many as seem to be applicable to their situation, whereas fundamentalists jealously guard the one central symbol of their

2https://www.christiancentury.org/article/critical-essay/how-white-

christians-turned-syncretism-insult

religion. Syncretism is usually criticized by religious specialists who feel that they are losing control and who may react by defending a fundamentalist view. Syncretists interpret the opportunity o ered by the growing contact between cultures and religions as a chance to combine religious repertoires for thought and action, whereas fundamentalists react to the moral side e ects of this contact by retreating to the traditional repertoire, even though they may make use of modern means of communication to spread their message. Both syncretism and fundamentalism seem to

ourish as a consequence of

modernization and globalization but for di erent reasons: one embracing the new situation, the other being critical of it because it is felt to threaten cherished traditions and morals. 3 Syncretism is the name given to the blending of elements from more than one religion into a distinct system of worship. Examples include the blending of Confucianism, Taoism, and Legalism in China during and after the Warring States period. Another is the cultural adaption of Buddhism into Japanese culture starting in the year 500 when Korean people brought it to Japan. Japanese culture incorporated Buddhism with a universal Shinto religion. Today, most Japanese people say, “I live my life as Shinto but will die as a Buddhist.” A great example of cultural syncretism is the Rastafarian movement in Jamaica. African-Hebrew and Christian religious practices blend together

3 A. Droogers, in International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral

Sciences, 2001. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/social-sciences/ syncretism

with Caribbean freed slave culture and a 19th-century Pan African identity to make something in uenced by many cultures but that is completely unique.

PERSONAL SYNCRETISM One might say that personal syncretism is as old as religion itself. Religious persecutions historically have almost always been about punishing those congregates who were suspected to have failed to observe the absolute teachings of a religious organization. Internationally, the history of the Catholic church is infamous for its persecutions that did not begin or end with that of Jesus. The Spanish inquisition resulted in hundreds of thousands being killed for being unable to prove their loyalty to the Church. In American history we see how religious non-conformity resulted in Massachusetts forcing many to leave the colony. Roger Williams and

Ann Hutchinson as well as William

Coddington and Samuel Gorton founded new settlements where they could freely express their beliefs. It was not uncommon for people to be rounded up on Sunday and called to task for working instead of observing the sabbath under threat of nes or jail. During the second Great Awakening in America, a Protestant religious revival during the early 19th century, it is said that over 1000 denominations existed. This is a time when Protestants

rejected the skepticism, deism, Unitarianism and rationalism left

over from the American Enlightenment. Individuals thought nothing of attaching themselves to a new belief system as the result of religious fervor at a tent meeting led by a traveling minister one day, only to be swayed by another minister’s tent meeting on another day. Absolute truths abounded. People were encouraged to make a “personal” connection with God. And new denominations such as Methodists and Baptist grew quickly embracing unique religious practices. Some called it a religious cafeteria with people picking and choosing their “brand” of beliefs. And indeed, if one examines the religious landscape today in America it is evident that a religious cafeteria exists. Many Catholics pick and choose the dogma they follow. The pope highlighted “the scandal given by Catholics who promote an alleged right to abortion,” as well as declining rates of marriage, rising rates of cohabitation, divorce and in delity, and the Jesusand-me theolo y that has convinced many Christians that they can mature in their faith without participating actively in a faith community.4

UNITARIAN UNIVERSALISM - A SYNCRETIC TRADITION Unitarian Universalism was formed from the consolidation in 1961 of two historically separate Christian denominations, the Universalist Church of America and the American Unitarian Association, both based in the United States; the new

4 https://archive.nytimes.com/thepope.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/17/37/

organization formed in this merger was the Unitarian Universalist Association. At the time of the North American consolidation, Unitarians and Universalists had expanded beyond their roots in liberal Christian theolo y. Today they draw from a variety of religious traditions. Individuals may or may not self-identify as Christians or subscribe to Christian beliefs. Unitarian Universalist congregations and fellowships tend to retain some Christian traditions, such as Sunday worship with a sermon and the singing of hymns. The extent to which the elements of any particular faith tradition are incorporated into personal spiritual practice is a matter of individual choice for congregants, in keeping with a creed-less, non-dogmatic approach to spirituality and faith development. N e w E n g l a n d U n i t a r i a n s e vo l ve d f ro m t h e P i l g r i m Fathers’ Congregational Christianity, which was originally based on a literal reading of the Holy Bible. Liberalizing Unitarians rejected the Trinitarian belief in the tri-personal godhead: Father, Son, and Holy Ghost/Spirit. Instead, they asserted a unitary notion of God. In addition, they rejected the doctrine of original sin, moving away from the Calvinism of the Congregationalists. New England Universalists rejected the Puritan forefathers’ emphasis on the select few, the Elect, who were supposed to be saved from eternal damnation by a just God. Instead Universalists asserted that all people will eventually be

reconciled with God. Universalists rejected the hell re and

damnation of the evangelical preachers, who tried to revive the fundamentalist Christianity of the early Pilgrim fathers.5 Since the merger of the Unitarian and Universalist church organizations, now sixty-one years ago, the beliefs of individual Unitarian Universalists have come to range widely, including all or part of atheism, agnosticism, pantheism, panentheism, pandeism, deism, humanism, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Sikhism, Buddhism, Taoism, Naturalism, Omnism, Bahá’i, and Neopaganism. NOW - A TIME FOR DISCUSSION In their new book “The Great Dechurching: Who’s Leaving, Why Are They Going and What Will It Take to Bring Them Back?” Jim Davis and Michael Graham with Ryan Burge argue that the most dramatic change may be in regular attendance at houses of worship. “We are currently in the middle of the largest and fastest religious shift in the history of our country,” they postulate, because “about 15 percent of American adults living today (around 40 million people) have e ectively stopped going to church, and most of this dechurching has happened in the past 25 years.”6 Jessica Grose wrote an opinion piece for the New York Times in June this year. Her own anecdotal research provided her with

5 https://slife.org/unitarian-universalism/

6 Provided by Jessica Grose in her opinion article.

reason to make this observation about those she spoke with: “many said they did miss aspects of traditional attendance, and often these people still believed in God or certain aspects of their previous faith traditions. They’d sought replacements for traditional worship, and the most common were spending time in nature, meditation and physical activity — basically anything that got them out of their own heads and the anxieties of the material world. How do we lead multi-faith if we don’t live multi-faith? There are important questions for us to answer as we approach the challenge of preparing ourselves for multi-faith leadership opportunities and how we approach multi-faith understandings within our own congregations. How do we acknowledge the religious histories of others in our own congregations? How do we a rm these religious histories? How do we incorporate these religious histories into our assemblies? How do we avoid what can seem disparaging to these histories? For instance, comments about not liking the talk of God in our

ffi

services?

How do we form good practices of understanding that these histories are part and parcel of a person regardless of the fact that they have formally left them behind? How do we form positive views of sacred texts, religious music and ritual within our own congregations? How do we build spiritual practices employing these histories? The answers to these questions should lead us to being able to embrace syncretism, both institutionally and individually.

SYNCRETIC ADJECTIVE: CHARACTERIZED OR BROUGHT ABOUT BY A COMBINATION OF DIFFERENT FORMS OF BELIEF OR PRACTICE SYNCRETISM NOUN: THE COMBINING OF DIFFERENT RELIGIONS, CULTURES, OR IDEAS