So, what is Syncretic Religion? (tradition, contradiction, beliefs, choice)

[Davidium]

Ok, I noticed that UU has been moved to the catagory of Syncretic Relgion...

And so, I'm just curious, what is meant by Syncretic Religion? I have never heard UU Catagorized that way...

I'm not necessarily saying it is wrong, and I have stared a discussion on this topic in a UU Theology forum, but I was curious what the thought behind the move was here.

My religious thought is syncretic, but I am not certain that is true of the majority of UU's... Syncretic religion is a step beyond pluralistic religion, and I'm not sure the movement has done that yet.

I'm looking forward to the discussion...

Yours in Faith,

David

[Green Gaia]

Syncretism is the attempt to reconcile disparate, even opposing, beliefs and to meld practices of various schools of thought.

UU can be catagorized in several different ways. Pluralistic, syncretic, secular, even Judeo-Christian based (if you're going on roots).This becomes a problem when you're trying to catagorize religions for a list or forum or whatever. There are always several that will fit in different catagories.

I believe we are a syncretic religion. While we may trace our roots to Christian movements, we now freely incorporate elements from other religious and non-religious traditions and make them our own. Yes, some congregations do so more than others. But the freedom to do so is there for every UU. It is a step beyond pluralism and one that no other major religion has taken. I feel this sets UU apart from other religions and therefore it is accurate to describe UU as syncretic in a list of religions.

[Davidium]

Syncretism is the attempt to reconcile disparate, even opposing, beliefs and to meld practices of various schools of thought

You see, I'm not certain that is what we do....

Honestly, I think that emphasizing this aspect of our faith is detrimental to our own tradition, which some claim goes all the way back to the Council of Nicea in 325, with the expulsion of the Heretic Arius from the Council.

I'm not sure I go back that far, but I do believe that we are the inheritors of a tradition that is so much more than "the attempt to reconcile disparate, even opposing, beliefs and to meld practices of various schools of thought". We have a liberal faith tradition of choice... a faith of Heresy. A faith of social action. A faith that believes in the essence of goodness in humanity, and that religious inspiration is continuous, and can be found in many different traditions.

I understand what you are saying Maize, but I think it is the wrong classification. I think it is too limited, and leaves our tradition behind in favor of a melding of other traditions. I think our tradition is what is at our core, not an amalgam of other faiths.

I am still pondering, but this is my thoughts on this. I was more comfortable with the earlier classification of "Modern" religions... but you and I have talked about this before, UU defies easy classification... and thank God for that! I dont want a faith that is easily labeled.

Yours in faith,

David

[lilithu]

I believe that Maize made the move at least partly in response to the discussion that came out of this thread:
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum...56651#poststop

I argued that UU is a syncretic religion. And yes, it is one step beyond pluralism and not a universally held opinion. The problem is that there is no such thing as a "pluralistic religon." That's a contradiction in terms. If we are pluralistic then we are a plurality of different religions. So what it boils down to is whether we are indeed a religion as opposed to what some call us, a "religious movement." I say we are a religion. And if we are a religion, do we recognize the many "sources" from which we borrow or will we ignore that in favor of lifting up our Arian, ie- Christian, roots? I say we recognize the many sources, and indeed the UUA says so too. In which case we are a syncretic religion, whether we explicitly say so or not.

Originally Posted by Davidium

I understand what you are saying Maize, but I think it is the wrong classification. I think it is too limited, and leaves our tradition behind in favor of a melding of other traditions. I think our tradition is what is at our core, not an amalgam of other faiths.

I don't think this is necessarily the case. I don't believe that syncretism requires a loss of identity. Rather it recognizes the influences of others on the core identity and the change of that identity over time. And we have changed over time. We are no longer just a liberal Christian faith, as Arianism was.

Originally Posted by Davidium

I am still pondering, but this is my thoughts on this. I was more comfortable with the earlier classification of "Modern" religions...

Wouldn't that label go even further in terms of obscuring our deep roots? To me the term "modern religion" implies something that was invented recently, like Scientology or the Unification church (Moonies). I originally voted for us to stay in "modern" but that's just because I thought it was amusing. I believe the most accurate descriptor is "syncretic," but concede that all descriptors will be misleading to some extent or another.

**ADDENDUM:**
Hey Maize, where are Scientology and the Unification church located within this new categorization system? Just curious.

[Green Gaia]

Scientology is in the New Religious Movements section and we don't have a listing for the Unification church.

[lilithu]

Maize, fwiw, I was reading your post to huajiro in the Christian UU thread on how we are not a blend of all religions:

Not quite... UUs don't "mix" all religions, but rather recognize the wisdom and truth in all of them. That doesn't mean we follow them all, or blend them together to get UUism. I'm no more Hindu than I am Jewish, but I can see the beauty in both religions and learn from them. I believe a Christian can be a UU and saying that all Christians believe their God is a jealous one, is unfair.

And it seems to me from this that Davidium is right. We're not syncretic.

[Green Gaia]

Yeah, I know.... it bothers me. But where to put us? We are in a catagory all our own!

[lilithu]

Originally Posted by Maize

Yeah, I know.... it bothers me. But where to put us? We are in a catagory all our own!

Just out of curiosity... and at the risk of initiating total bedlam... what would my UU sisters and brothers think of moving UU to the same category as atheism/agnosticism/humanism? I wouldn't call it "secular beliefs." I'd call it "Humanist traditions" and move Deism in there as well. (Right now, it's kinda weird that Deism is listed with Taoism and Confucianism.) My argument is that atheism, agnosticism, Deism, and UU all come from the humanist tradition that gained full fource during the Rennaissance - a tradition that puts human reason and human experience above revelation and other sources of spiritual authority.

BUT I totally understand if people object. It might make it seem like we're hostile to religion, which we're not.

What d'yall think? At the very least I am curious to see how other UUs think of where we are in relation to other religions.

[Green Gaia]

That would be OK with me. Still not exactly a perfect fit, but as has been shown, we defy conventional categorization, and we wouldn't have it any other way!

I'd like to hear other UUs thoughts on this too.