Syncretism

Please help support the mission of New Advent and get the full contents of this website as an instant download. Includes the Catholic Encyclopedia, Church Fathers, Summa, Bible and more — all for only $19.99...

Fromsygkretizein (not fromsygkerannynai.)

An explanation is given by Plutarch in a small work on brotherlylove ("Opera Moralia", ed. Reiske, VII, 910). He there tells how the Cretans were often engaged in quarrels among themselves, but became immediately reconciled when an external enemy approached. "And that is their so-called Syncretism." In the sixteenth century the term became known through the "Adagia" ofErasmus, and came into use to designate the coherence of dissenters in spite of their difference of opinions, especially with reference totheological divisions. Later, when the term came to be referred tosygkerannynai, it was inaccurately employed to designate the mixture of dissimilar or incompatible things orideas. This inexact use continues to some extent even today.

(1) Syncretism is sometimes used to designate the fusion ofpaganreligions. In the East the intermixture of the civilizations of different nations began at a very early period. When the East was hellenized under Alexander the Great and the Diadochi in the fourth century , the Grecian and Oriental civilizations were brought into contact, and a compromise to a large extent effected. The foreigndeities were identified with the native (e.g. Serapis = Zeus, Dionysus) and a fusion of the cults succeeded. After the Romans had conquered the Greeks, the victors, as is known, succumbed to the culture of the vanquished, and the ancient Roman religion became completely hellenized. Later the Romans gradually received all thereligions of the peoples whom they subdued, so thatRome became the "temple of the whole world". Syncretism reached its culmination in the third century under the emperorsCaracalla,Heliogabalus, andAlexander Severus (211-35). The countless cults of the Roman Empire were regarded as unessential forms of the same thing—a view which doubtless strengthened the tendency towardsMonotheism.Heliogabalus even sought to combineChristianity andJudaism with his religion, the cult of the sun-god. Julia Mamæa, the mother ofAlexander Severus, attended in Alexandria the lectures ofOrigen, and Alexander placed in hislararium the images of Abraham and Christ.

(2) A modern tendency in the history ofreligions sees in the Biblicalrevealedreligion a product of syncretism, the fusion of various religious forms and views. As regards theOld Testament, theChanaanite myth, theEgyptian, OldBabylonian, and Persianreligions are regarded as the sources ofIsraelitic religion, the latter itself having developed from Fetichism andAnimism into Henotheism andMonotheism. It is sought to explain the origin ofChristianity from the continuation and development of Jewishideas and the influx of Brahmanistic,Buddhist, Græco-Roman, andEgyptian religious notions, and from theStoic and Philonic philosophy; it is held to have received its development and explanation especially. from theneo-Platonic philosophy. ThatJudaism andChristianity agree with otherreligions in many of their external forms andideas, istrue ; many religiousideas are common to allmankind. The points of agreement between theBabylonianreligions and the Jewish.faith, which provoked a lively discussion some years ago after the appearance of Friedrich Delitzsch's "Babel und Bibel", maybe explained in so far as they exist (e.g.) as due to an original revelation, of which traces, albeit tainted withPolytheism, appear among the Babylonians. In many cases the agreement can be shown to be merely in form, not in content; in others it isdoubtful which religion contained the original and which borrowed. As to the special doctrines of theBible search has been vainly made for sources from which they might have been derived.Catholictheology holds firmly to revelation and to the foundation ofChristianity byJesus of Nazareth.

(3) The Syncretistic Strife is the name given to thetheological quarrel provoked by the efforts of Georg Calixt and his supporters to secure a basis on which theLutherans could make overtures to theCatholic and the Reformed Churches. It lasted from 1640 to 1686. Calixt, a professor in Helmstedt, had through his travels inEngland,Holland,Italy, andFrance, through his acquaintance with the different Churches and their representatives, and through his extensive study, acquired a more friendly attitude towards the different religious bodies than was then usual among the majority ofLutherantheologians. While the latter firmly adhered to the "pure doctrine", Calixt was not disposed to regarddoctrine as the one thingnecessary in order to be aChristian, while indoctrine itself he did not regard everything as equally certain and important. Consequently, he advocated unity between those who were in agreement concerning the fundamental minimum, with liberty as to all less fundamental points. In regard toCatholicism, he was prepared (asMelanchthon once was) to concede to thepope a primacy human in origin, and he also admitted that the Mass might be called a sacrifice. On the side of Calixt stood thetheological faculties of Helmstedt, Rinteln, and Königsberg; opposed to him were those of Leipzig, Jena,Strasburg, Giessen, Marburg, and Greifswald. His chief opponent was Abraham Calov. The Elector of Saxony was for political reasons an opponent of the Reformed Church, because the other two secular electors (Palatine and Brandenburg) were "reformed", and were getting more and more the advantage of him. In 1649 he sent to the three dukes ofBrunswick, who maintained Helmstedt as their commonuniversity, a communication in which he voices all the objections of hisLutheran professors, and complains that Calixt wished to extract the elements oftruth from allreligions, fuse all into an entirely new religion, and so provoke a violentschism. In 1650 Calov was called toWittenberg as professor, and he signalized his entrance into office with a vehement attack on the Syncretists in Helmstedt. An outburst of polemical writings followed. In 1650 the dukes ofBrunswick answered the Elector of Saxony that the discord should not be allowed to increase, and proposed a meeting of the political councillors. Saxony, however, did not favour this suggestion. An attempt to convene a meeting oftheologians was not more successful. Thetheologians ofWittenberg and Leipzig now elaborated a new formula, in which ninety-eightheresies of the Helmstedttheologians were condemned. This formula (consensus) was to be signed by everyone who wished to remain in theLutheran Church. OutsideWittenberg and Leipzig, however, it was not accepted, and Calixt's death in 1656 was followed by five years of almost undisturbed peace.

The strife was renewed in Hesse-Cassel, where Landgrave Wilhelm VI sought to effect a union between hisLutheran and Reformed subjects, or at least to lessen their mutualhatred. In 1661 he had a colloquy held in Cassel between theLutherantheologians of the University of Rinteln and the Reformedtheologians of the University of Marburg. Enraged at this revival of the Syncretism of Calixt, theWittenbergtheologians in vehement terms called on the Rimteln professors to make their submission, whereupon the latter answered with a detailed defence. Another long series of polemical treatises followed. In Brandenburg-Prussia the Great Elector (Frederick William I) forbade (1663) preachers to speak of the disputes between the Evangelical bodies. A long colloquy in Berlin (Sept., 1662-May, 1663) led only to fresh discord. In 1664 the elector repeated his command that preachers of both parties should abstain from mutual abuse, and should attribute to the other party nodoctrine which was not actually held by such party. Whoever refused to sign the form declaring his intention to observe this regulation, was deprived of his position (e.g. Paul Gerhardt, writer of religious songs). This arrangement was later modified, in that the forms were withdrawn, and action was taken only against those who disturbed the peace. The attempts of theWittenbergtheologians to declare Calixt and hisschool un-Lutheran andheretical were now met by Calixt's son, Friedrich Ulrich Calixt, The latter defended thetheology of hisfather, but also tried to show that hisdoctrine did not so very much differ from that of his opponents.Wittenberg found its new champion in Ægidius Strauch, who attacked Calixt with all the resources of learning, polemics, sophistry, wit, cynicism, and abuse. The Helmnstedt side was defended by the celebrated scholar and statesman, Hermann Conring. The Saxon princes now recognized the danger that the attempt to carry through the "Consensus" as a formula ofbelief might lead to a freshschism in theLutheran Church, and might thus render its position difficult in the face of theCatholics. The proposals of Calov and his party to continue the refutation and to compel the Brunswicktheologians to bind themselves underobligation to the oldLutheran confession, were therefore not carried into effect. On the contrary the Saxontheologians were forbidden to continue the strife in writing. Negotiations for peace then resulted, Duke Ernst the Pious of Saxe-Gotha being especially active towards this end, and the project of establishing a permanent college oftheologians to decidetheological disputes was entertained. However, the negotiations with the courts ofBrunswick,Mecklenburg,Denmark, and Sweden were as fruitless as those with thetheological faculties, except that peace was maintained until 1675. Calov then renewed hostilities. Besides Calixt, his attack was now directed particularly against the moderate John Musæus of Jena. Calov succeeded in having the whole University of Jena (and after a long resistance Musæus himself) compelled to renounce Syncretism. But this was his last victory. The elector renewed his prohibition against polemical writings. Calov seemed to give way, since in 1683 he asked whether, in the view of the danger whichFrance then constituted forGermany, a Calixtinic Syncretism with "Papists" and the Reformed were still condemnable, and whether in deference to the Elector of Brandenburg and the dukes ofBrunswick, the strife should not be buried by an amnesty, or whether, on the contrary, thewar against Syncretism should be continued. He later returned to his attack on the Syncretists, but died in 1686, and with his death the strife ended. The result of the Syncretist Strife was that it lessened religioushatred and promoted mutual forbearance.Catholicism was thus benefited, as it came to be better understood and appreciated byProtestants. InProtestanttheology it prepared the way for the sentimentaltheology ofPietism as the successor of fossilizedorthodoxy.

(4) Concerning Syncretism in the doctrine of grace, seeCONTROVERSIES ON GRACE.

CONTACT US |ADVERTISE WITH NEW ADVENT