Definition Of Fundamentalist

[jamesAMDG]

I see the word Fundamentalist being thrown around alot here as well as Moderate and Progressive. I would like to add two important things to this discussion.

 

Firstly, Fundamenlist and Fundamentalism are relatively new terms, dating from the early part fo the 1900s. Starting in 1909, two rich oil men, Milton and Lyman Stewart put up the money to print a 12 volume set on the fundamentals of the Christian Faith (but more accurately Protestant, as far as I can discern). This set of books was called The Fundamentals and its is from the adherence to these core values that a person could be legitamately described as a fundamentalist.

 

According to these works the fundamentals are: (I) the inspiration and what the writers call infallibility of Scripture, (2) the deity of Christ (including his virgin birth), (3) the substitutionary atonement of his death, (4) his literal resurrection from the dead, and (5) his literal return at the Second Coming.

 

However, it should also be noted that "The belief that is first and foremost the defining characteristic of Fundamentalists is their reliance on the Bible to the complete exclusion of any authority exercised by the Church. The second is their insistence on a faith in Christ as one’s personal Lord and Savior. " (taken from )here

 

Secondly, it seems to me that most of the discussion and debate about what beliefs and doctrines are necessary (as well as discussion of others who claim to hold the Faith of Christ) revolves around a particularly protestant idea of what it means to be a Christian. This being characterized by the idea of everyone having a "personal" theology and their particular interpretation (or syncretization) being valid. This leaves out most of the Christian world (particularly those outside of North America and Western Europe) were Catholicism (Roman and other rites in communion with the Pope) and the different Orthodox churches which both have a heirarchy and well-defined limits about what cannot and cannot be held in relation to Christ, the Scriptures, Sin, etc. Am the only one noticing this?

 

Peace of Christ in His Sacred Heart, through the intercession of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

 

jAMDG

[AletheiaRivers]

Secondly, it seems to me that most of the discussion and debate about what beliefs and doctrines are necessary ... revolves around a particularly protestant idea of what it means to be a Christian.

 

Yeah, I've noticed this.

 

Unfortunately I, having been raised a Jdub (un-officially protestant), don't really know anything about Catholicism when it comes to doctrine other than what the JW's decried as being "not the truth".

 

Do you consider yourself a "progressive Catholic"?

 

One of my favorite authors, Thomas Moore, was a monk and is still Catholic despite disagreements over doctrine. He considers it home and has no intention of leaving. I respect that.

 

I don't think Matt Fox would have left the priesthood if he hadn't been officially "silenced" (is that the term?) by the Church for having a witch, Starhawk, on his teaching staff at Naropa University. Now he's Episcopalian, but I think he still considers Catholicism home.

 

Most of my favorite thinkers are or were Catholic, but most of them had issue with one or another Catholic doctrine. LOL. I guess that happens no matter what denomination you belong to, huh?

 

I, for one, would love to learn more about the Catholic view of Christ as long as my "progressive" bent wouldn't get in the way.

 

Aletheia

 

PS: The big difference I've noticed between Evangelicals and Fundementalists is that Fundementalists don't want anything to do with society or other Christians that are not Fundementalists.

 

Fundementalists don't like Evangelicals because Evangelicals on whole, will talk to the Catholic church. Evangelicals are ecumenical, Fundementalists are not.

Edited January 27, 2005 by AletheiaRivers