Syncretism is a very broad term that has uses in many different types of study, ranging from Linguistics, Cognitive Sciences, Psychology, Computer Science and many others, but its most controversial reign exists in that of the study of Religion. In the book The World Religions, author Anita Maria Leopold addresses the topic of Syncretism and validates it as a topic worthy of study in the field of Religion. She goes through many steps to arrive at her final view on the topic, “[that] syncretism is continually an important subject for the study of religion” (Leopold 696). She does this by going through its history, mainly revolving around the syncretistic strife caused by theologian Georg Calixt due to, “what he called the theological evidence
…show more content…
Leopold starts off by referencing a piece written by Harvey Whitehouse called Arguments and Icons: Divergent Modes of Religiosity (Leopold 701). She uses this piece while talking about the earlier controversies against Syncretism or in other words, Anti-Syncretism, which have arisen from Christians. She says that Christians have so much to do with this struggle due to them wanting to protect the truth in their monotheistic belief; wanting to keep the dogma intact, and provide keep its interpretation intact. They do this by making their members believe solely in tradition stated by their church, and as such makes it so their homogeneity is secured. Whitehouse states that this “sanctioning in doctrinal transmission links religious revelation to moral issues” (Leopold 701). She provides proof of this Anti-Syncretism by citing a case on the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (LCMS) which revolves around “two pastors in the LCMS who were accused of syncretism because they participated in post-September 11 prayer activities together with different Christian and non-Christian clergy.” (Leopold 701). This case is a big reason why many people are hesitant at the mention of Syncretism, but at the same time shows the importance of the issue. Power should not be so easily abused by individuals in these religious sanctions, …show more content…
One can think of it as “passive-syncretism” but the fact of the matter is that opinions, ideals, priorities, everything that has to do with humans, which in turn has to do with religion, will change over time. The Semiotic level focuses on the fact that Syncretism simply is not accidental. When one religion borrows something from another religious tradition, they do this knowingly, “selected for the purpose of a particular religious paradigm” (Leopold 703). An example of this is best put in the words of anthropologist Andre Droogers, which is the, “[comparison] of syncretism to metaphors. Like metaphors, syncretistic formations have a rich potential of meaning… However, this double stock of meaning may give rise to an ambiguity of meanings.” (Leopold 703) Similarly to metaphors, people pick out certain things from different religions to make a point, but like metaphors, this will add confusion to the members, as well as the original meaning, as metaphors can be expressed in different ways depending on the context/situation. This adds to the semiotic definition of meaning-making as the comparison of Syncretism to metaphors shows the complexity behind Syncretistic formations. To expand on this Leopold explains that “new input enhances and restores old traditions, because religious transformation takes part in the general historical changes in a society”
Leopold starts off by referencing a piece written by Harvey Whitehouse called Arguments and Icons: Divergent Modes of Religiosity (Leopold 701). She uses this piece while talking about the earlier controversies against Syncretism or in other words, Anti-Syncretism, which have arisen from Christians. She says that Christians have so much to do with this struggle due to them wanting to protect the truth in their monotheistic belief; wanting to keep the dogma intact, and provide keep its interpretation intact. They do this by making their members believe solely in tradition stated by their church, and as such makes it so their homogeneity is secured. Whitehouse states that this “sanctioning in doctrinal transmission links religious revelation to moral issues” (Leopold 701). She provides proof of this Anti-Syncretism by citing a case on the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (LCMS) which revolves around “two pastors in the LCMS who were accused of syncretism because they participated in post-September 11 prayer activities together with different Christian and non-Christian clergy.” (Leopold 701). This case is a big reason why many people are hesitant at the mention of Syncretism, but at the same time shows the importance of the issue. Power should not be so easily abused by individuals in these religious sanctions, …show more content…
One can think of it as “passive-syncretism” but the fact of the matter is that opinions, ideals, priorities, everything that has to do with humans, which in turn has to do with religion, will change over time. The Semiotic level focuses on the fact that Syncretism simply is not accidental. When one religion borrows something from another religious tradition, they do this knowingly, “selected for the purpose of a particular religious paradigm” (Leopold 703). An example of this is best put in the words of anthropologist Andre Droogers, which is the, “[comparison] of syncretism to metaphors. Like metaphors, syncretistic formations have a rich potential of meaning… However, this double stock of meaning may give rise to an ambiguity of meanings.” (Leopold 703) Similarly to metaphors, people pick out certain things from different religions to make a point, but like metaphors, this will add confusion to the members, as well as the original meaning, as metaphors can be expressed in different ways depending on the context/situation. This adds to the semiotic definition of meaning-making as the comparison of Syncretism to metaphors shows the complexity behind Syncretistic formations. To expand on this Leopold explains that “new input enhances and restores old traditions, because religious transformation takes part in the general historical changes in a society”