It is not my intent to offend with the picture above, but it most certainly does give a good visual example of what happens when there is syncretism. Syncretism is not merely the use of practices or clothing or even similar sounding names from another culture. Syncretism is the transfer not simply of a practice or clothing or name from another culture, but the transfer of meaning from one religious culture to another. I can give you a good example. No modern person believes that they are praising Janus when they use the name January for the current first month of the year. None of us believe that we are honoring the Anglo-Saxon god Wöden when we call the fourth day of the week, Wednesday (Wöden’s Day) or Thor on Thursday. These are innocent transfers of names from one culture to another. In the process of the transfer, they lost all theological meaning and any connection with any god or demon. This is the problem for those who claim that Anglo-Saxon Christians, and their linguistic descendants, are syncretists for using the name Easter for Pascha. While I wrote a longer post about this, only one source even mentions that there is a goddess called Eöstre, and even that source only comments that Easter became synonymous with Pascha because on the Anglo-Saxon calendar Pascha fell most often on Eöstre’s month. That is not syncretism by any stretch of the imagination. Easter carries no pagan theological meaning whatsoever to those who use that word. If anything, it has been infused with Christian meaning. No one thinks of Eöstre in any way, shape, or form.
There is a second group of Christians that make a different argument, and it is an interesting one. These people argue that the use of anything that is connected with a former god opens one up to the influence of demons. These brethren will argue that one cannot engage in martial arts because many of the original practitioners saw martial arts in the context of their cultural/religious worldview. They will make similar arguments for any of several other activities, even if the practitioners do not have any connection left or even any thought of the original practitioners of the forbidden activity. If one looks at this argument closely, that group of Christians is arguing that “ritual” actions and “ritual” names have power that persists even when the people involved in practicing those actions and using those names have no idea of their meaning. Here is the problem for that group of Christians. This is basically a magical view of life, something that would most often be denied by that group. That is, that view argues that faith is not a necessary component for a practice, a name, or an object to be powerful. Frankly, this type of argument should make that group of people open-minded about Orthodox and Roman Catholic claims that objects can be blessed and ritual actions can be effective, even for people who do not believe. But, sadly, it never seems to have that effect. Apparently only evil can damn a practice or an object or a name. God cannot bless any object, practice, or name. I would not care to make that argument.
Yet, syncretism really does exist. In Cuban Santería the practitioners are quite aware that several West African gods and goddesses are represented by Roman Catholic saints. African slaves were forbidden from practicing their religion by Spanish authorities. But, devotion to the saints was encouraged. It is not surprising that Roman Catholic saints who had attributes that resembled those of the West African gods began to be used as fachadas (façades) for the forbidden West African gods and goddesses. This is a case of true syncretism. In the same way, Día de los Muertos became a semi-recognized celebration, but it was the continuation of various Aztec practices and festival of the dead. Again, because of Spanish Roman Catholic strictures, these celebrations were condensed into the feast of All Saints and the feast of All Faithful Departed on 01 & 02 November. Various practices associated with the old religions were shoved into this celebration. This is another example of true syncretism, particularly because several of the theological beliefs of the old religion have now associated themselves with some parts of Central and South American Roman Catholicism. It is easy to see which they are, because they are not found in the Roman Catholicism of non-Latino countries.
I am going to stop the series here, although much more could be said. However, I wish you go understand that there is a difference between inculturation and syncretism. And, I also wish you to understand that many critics of Christianity are very deliberately obfuscating the difference between those two concepts. Sadly some of those critics are Christians who ought to know better. If you do a search online of Christianity and syncretism, you will find all to many so-called Christians who are happy to argue that any practice, item, or name in another denomination which can even vaguely be associated with a god or goddess is an example of sinful syncretism. This is simply not true. Whenever two cultures rub against each other, some transference will take place. In most cases it is benign. In some cases, it is true syncretism. It is important that we differentiate between the two.
thanks for this series. I learn a lot from your writings and comments over at internetmonk
Another inculturation mistaken for syncretism is the use of contemporary music amongst Christians, whether that be as part of a church service of in the culture at large. I don’t hear as much about this as I used to, but I remember some folks back in the 70’s & 8-‘s complaining that rock music (the melody, that is) was demonic as it resembled African rhythms used to summon spirits (this was said to be especially true of the drumbeats). Not that I’m a fan of rock & roll, but as you said, the notion of such things is more magical and superstitious than factual.
Yes, that is another type of magical thinking. Nowadays, it seems strange to argue that certain rhythms will automatically call demons. But, that is exactly what they were arguing, was it not?
Did you ever read Arturo Vasquez’s blog. I think he’s taken most of his stuff down, but he used to write fascinating blog posts about folk religion, usually from a rather sympathetic point of view. On another note, I wonder how many in your second category realize how much their own worldview is shaped by the Enlightenment and neoliberalism. Mark Noll, a surprisingly honest Evangelical historian has a spectacular book on this topic, called America’s God. He argues that, while Christianity did have an influence on American culture, in turn, the Enlightenment values of many of the “Founding Fathers” hardly orthodox (little “o”) Christians, also permeated the varieties of Christianity that developed here. No wonder we have people calling Pope Francis a Marxist.
I would agree with Mark Noll, he is a good writer, though I have not read that particular book.
Expanding on CalvinCuban’s comment, what would your opinion be, Fr Orthoduck, about acceptable styles of music in liturgies (or praise and worship services for most Protestants) and whether or not Roman Catholics and Protestants have played along the borders of inculturation or syncretism?
For example, I know that there exist Roman Catholic bishops who permit a “LifeTeen Mass,” where comtemporary music, even some rock-n-roll, is allowed to played in the place of traditional hymns throughout the Mass. Songs written by Evangelical artists are performed that were never intended liturgies. In many mainline and modern Evangelical circles, music from many different genres can be found (rock, indie, techno, etc).
In Eastern Christianity, one of the beautiful aspects is that the Divine Liturgy and prayers take on the musical expressions characteristic of a particular culture, while mainting the tones and significance behind them. The Divine Liturgy sounds different in a Russian Rite than it would in a Greek Rite.
How far would be, “to far” to take this musical adaptation before it becomes syncretism rather than inculturation, if it does at all? A Protestant may have a problem with schremo music being performed in a worship service while accepting indie music. A Roman Catholic may have a problem with electronic music being presenting during the Mass, but is comfortable with contemporary music.
The East and the West took two different decisions with regard to music. The Early Church was unanimous in using only voices, and no instruments. Look at this article from Christian History magazine http://www.christianitytoday.com/ch/asktheexpert/nov30.html. Notice that the article points out that instrumental music was considered to be associated with lasciviousness, which is why it was not used in the Church.
In fact, as the article points out, it was not until somewhere between the 10th and 12th centuries that an instrument begins to be used in the Church in the West. Notice that this is about the time of the Great Schism. The Church in the East continues to be non-instrumental as do a few Protestants. Nowadays, some Orthodox allow the use of an organ, but only to help guide the singing, not to overwhelm it, but there are not many of those parishes.
The other thing that happened in the East is that the music stylized into a series of “tones.” Although there is still music writing going on, it has to fit certain musical rules, and the words must be the words that have been used for centuries. As a result, no Orthodox parish could or would use “modern” music.
Father Bless. Thank you for this series. The point about the temptation of a magical view of the world is a humbling one.
Was wondering how syncretism and inculturation fit into lex orandi est lex credendi (the law of worship is the law of belief)? If how we pray influences and is influenced by what we believe, perhaps Orthodox missiology requires living and understanding those we mission to? Ie. St Herman of Alaska or most recently Archbishop Anastasios of Albania.
It’s rather fascinating how the Church transfigures certain cultural and even pre-Christian religious images or practices into a local church’s praxis. While in other cases has encouraged abandonment of certain cultural practices which are antithetical to the Church’s lived theology. It seems that whatever was good and helped illumine or reveal Christ in our midst were retained but where possible these new local adaptions were building on an existing liturgical pattern or recension (ie. Transition from using Palm Branches to Pussywillows during Pascha in Russia) (or the story of Alaskan Missionaries wondering about how to teach the ethos of fasting to a people who only ate Caribou, and deciding that the way forward was to encourage the Christians to eat it a lot less of Caribou during Great Lent).
Ps. My apologies if the thoughts in this comment is a bit scattered. I do think and hope Orthodoxy is able to encounter all things and transfigure the philosophies, cultures and patterns in sync with the Church’s witness of Truth.
Inculturation does not change the content of the lex ordandi lex credendi. Syncretism changes the content of the faith. That is the difference in a nutshell.
So, do you use some musical instruments or do you not? The Copts and the Ethiopian Orthodox (and various of the African Orthodox) are more willing to do so, but that does not change content. Using pussy willows instead of palm branches has not caused a problem. Throwing out vestments would change the faith. (And, yes, I know that opens up a whole area of discussion.)
Father, would you consider the current heavy blend of nationalism and Tea Party politics with Christianity to be syncretism, or do you think there’s a better term to describe that phenomenon?
I do not consider it to be syncretism, although there is little doubt that American exceptionalism comes very close to being a Christian heresy, in some of its forms. I do consider it to be wrong-headed and to violate some of the tenets found in Matthew 24 and various parts of the Book of James. But, what exact political and economic system is most Christian is probably an unresolvable discussion. It is much easier to discuss what aspects of a political or economic system are least Christian.
Denmark’s abortion on demand and permissive euthanasia stance are definitely on the least Christian side. But, as to whether a democratic socialism is more Christian than a compassionate monarchy is a discussion as old as Plato’s Republic.
I have run into this problem with my yoga practice. I don’t speak of it much because so many of my evangelical friends were so highly mortified because I was “opening myself up to demons”. In my practice, it is mostly stretching but when I do more meditative and breath work, it is Jesus I am meditating on…Jesus I am visualizing. Yoga was designed to teach the body to hold very still for long periods of time during meditation; however, what we do here in the US bears no resemblance to that religious context. It has amazed me that so many people who have never tried it condemn the practice. That being said, I will admit that I do not chant if I don’t know what I am saying but Ohm is not a word…it is a tone that you can concentrate on to clear your mind.
I wish there was a citation for this statement, particularly for that in parens, from Christianity Today. Then, in about the 10th or 12th century, Western Christians began to use the organ in the liturgy. (The organ had been used in processions and possibly as a call to worship centuries earlier, but it seems to have made its way only slowly into the actual liturgy.)
I know that the organ was used in processions. In South America, the processions are frequently led by a band, often the police band. There is a very long tradition of outdoor services and instrumental music. But, I only brought it up when it went inside the church building and began to be used for the Divine Liturgy.