Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion

2014 Edition
| Editors: David A. Leeming

Syncretism

Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6086-2_679

The term “syncretism” has had different denotations and connotations over time. In current usage in anthropology and religious studies, it generally refers to a mixing of elements from different religious systems or traditions. From the perspective of many religious leaders, such a mixing is often viewed as a negative process, as an abandoning of true religion. From the perspective of many anthropologists, psychologists, and professionals of other academic disciplines, religious syncretism may assist in a positive acculturation process, whereby elements of different systems emerge in a new format allowing an integration of ideas and behaviors. It is important to bear in mind that whatever example of syncretism is in focus, it always takes place in a psychocultural and sociopolitical context, and therefore, the psychological effects of such need to include those levels of analysis. Though a central historical concept, globalization as well as the challenges of voluntary and forced...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Bibliography

  1. Bastide, R. (1978). The African religions of Brazil, toward a sociology of the interpenetration of civilizations. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bauman, Z. (1998). Postmodern religion? In P. Heelas (Ed.), Religion, modernity and postmodernity. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  3. Bayly, S. (1989). Saints, Goddesses, and kings: Muslims and Christians in South Indian society, 1700–1900. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Burger, H. (1966). Syncretism: An acculturative accelerator. Human Organization, 25(2), 103–115.Google Scholar
  5. DeMarinis, V. (2003). Pastoral care, existential health and existential epidemiology: A Swedish postmodern case study. Stockholm: Verbum Press.Google Scholar
  6. Droogers, A. (1989). Syncretism: The problem of definition, the definition of the problem. In J. D. Gort, H. M. Vroom, R. Fernhout, & A. Wessels (Eds.), Dialogue and syncretism, an interdisciplinary approach. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans & Rodopi.Google Scholar
  7. Greenfield, S., & Droogers, A. (Eds.). (2001). Reinventing religions: Syncretism and transformation in Africa and the Americas. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  8. Hayden, R. (2002). Antagonistic tolerance: Competitive sharing of religious sites in South Asia and the Balkins. Current Anthropology, 43, 205–231.Google Scholar
  9. Inglehart, R. (1996). Globalization and postmodern values. The Washington Quarterly, 23, 215–228.Google Scholar
  10. Marsella, A., & Yamada, A. (2000). Culture and mental health: An introduction and overview of foundations, concepts and issues. In I. Cúellar & F. A. Paniagua (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural health: Assessment and treatment of diverse populations. San Diego: Academic.Google Scholar
  11. Shaw, R., & Stewart, C. (1994). Introduction: Problematizing syncretism. In S. Stewart & R. Shaw (Eds.), Syncretism/anti-syncretism, the politics of religious synthesis. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Van der Veer, P. (1994). Syncretism, multiculturalism and the discourse of tolerance. In S. Stewart & R. Shaw (Eds.), Syncretism/anti-syncretism, the politics of religious synthesis. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Werbner, R. (1994). Afterward. In S. Stewart & R. Shaw (Eds.), Syncretism/anti-syncretism, the politics of religious synthesis. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Uppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden