Christian-Muslim Episcopalian Priest

[gnomon]

Originally Posted by Jordan St. Francis

Religious syncretism like this will be the death of religion.

Really.

It seems to be a process that current, long standing traditional religions went through in the past. While it may signal an end to certain traditional philosophies it doesn't mean the end. I'm sure the Bretons thought as much when Vortigen laid eyes on a certain Saxon pagan.

Okay, that didn't make sense. But I don't think that even if someone tries to combine what is accepted by some as two different religions that this spells the end of religion.

[a_student]

Originally Posted by gnomon

I don't think that even if someone tries to combine what is accepted by some as two different religions that this spells the end of religion.

I think he means what you said, the end of that particular religion. I heard a Muslim Imam say that "once you add something to the religion of Islam, you are no longer practicing Islam." In essence, you are practicing something else that may have spawned from the original, but it is not, in fact that original practice.

[gnomon]

Originally Posted by a_student

I think he means what you said, the end of that particular religion. I heard a Muslim Imam say that "once you add something to the religion of Islam, you are no longer practicing Islam." In essence, you are practicing something else that may have spawned from the original, but it is not, in fact that original practice.

Got ya. I thought I might have misunderstood.

But at least I got to mention Vortigen no matter how obscure he is and how irrelevant to this thread.

[Jordan St. Francis]

I mean that if enough people start ripping beliefs that strike them on the emotional level out of the systematic theology or philosophy in which alone those beliefs are coherent, religion itself will gradually become a set of incoherent superstitions or emotionalized rhetoric.

As an example, I can't tell you how many people I know who readily believe in karma but have not put any thought whatsoever into whether or not re-incarnation might be true. The concept of karma demands resolution in re-incarnation or rebirth.

This kind of indifference to the internal logic of a given religious tradition, in my honest opinion, threatens the integrity of all religions and risks turning them into mere individual opinions and intuitions without the ability to shape culture or enliven society.

[Father Heathen]

Originally Posted by Jordan St. Francis

Religious syncretism like this will be the death of religion.

How? That's how most of the religions were born (including yours). I don't exactly see the Bahai faith bringing all of the other abrahamic religions to their knees.

Originally Posted by Jordan St. Francis

The concept of karma demands resolution in re-incarnation or rebirth.

No, it doesn't.

[spiritually inclined]

I mean that if enough people start ripping beliefs that strike them on the emotional level out of the systematic theology or philosophy in which alone those beliefs are coherent, religion itself will gradually become a set of incoherent superstitions or emotionalized rhetoric.

It is true that rigid theology will contradict other forms of theology. Not everyone, however, views theology with dogmatic eyes. People come to their own understandings while taking guidance -- not dictations -- from their traditions. At least, that's how it happens in more laid back churches.

As for religions turning into "incoherent superstitions or emotionalized rhetoric", a lot of them already are, and I'm not just talking about the liberals. Orthodox religion has a lot of that crap in it.

Religious syncretism is not going to kill religion. That is how the Christian religion was born. The Unitarian Universalist Association, besides the Christian religion, is probably one of the most syncretistic religions of all. It is a religion that does manage to shape minds, spiritual communities, and definitely politics. They are bound together not by common beliefs or creeds, but by a common agreement to affirm certain moral principles.

James

[TashaN]

I would like to add that, some people don't see religions as which camp they should belong to or something, but they see it more as seeking spiritual guidance for themselves as "individuals" regradless of what society might try to impose on them.

I think this Priest was brave enough to decleare her beliefs, because even if other cases exited, they will be highly discouraged from doing so, if not being decleared and labled as the *enemy of God* by some religious figures who feel that this might destroy the *image* of the church, in the eyes of those who belong to it. Some people will even go so far and think of those who declear their adherents to two faiths as a "threat".

[Victor]

Originally Posted by spiritually inclined

Religious syncretism is not going to kill religion. That is how the Christian religion was born. The Unitarian Universalist Association, besides the Christian religion, is probably one of the most syncretistic religions of all. It is a religion that does manage to shape minds, spiritual communities, and definitely politics. They are bound together not by common beliefs or creeds, but by a common agreement to affirm certain moral principles.

Don't confuse influences and movements such as Arianism, Manichaeism, Valentianism, etc. to the religious syncretism you see now. Whatever perceived syncretism of early times can be seen to have always been opposed via a council or a letter by an orthodox clergy. It would be a mistake to view early Christianity as a fluid entity with no way to find form. From it’s infancy in the book of Acts one can read about one of the earliest movements (Judaizers, who could be easily seen as the arch-nemesis of Marcionites) that was quite a strong force and yet the early church came to solution to it (thorough dialogue in a Council). They always fought against any change in dogma, while refining its own definitions and further clarifying realities from within and outside its walls.

[Jordan St. Francis]