cms@dragon.uucp (07/18/90)
On the question of fundamentalism: Once, I received a phone call from a
polling organization (I don't recall the name). The questioner asked me if I
were a fundamentalist Christian. I gave an affirmative "yes, absolutely." As
a Catholic, I have the basic attitude that Catholicism is truly fundamental
Christianity. Hmm, let me put it this way: Catholicism is conservative;
Protestant beliefs are liberal. This is an attitude, not a belief. At the
time, I had no idea Fundamentalism referring to a particular sect
or kind of Protestant. I vaguely recall being given a list of denominations;
when Catholic wasn't among them, I became confused. I was told to pick the
"closest" to my beliefs. Being Catholic, Fundamentalist seemed to hit it. I
probably skewed the results of some national survey. Still, it was slanted
making the assumption that no one was Catholic, or perhaps it was simply geared
towards Protestants. It kind of reminded me of a Pepsi test I once took in
Hendersonville, N.C. I tasted two cups, one Pepsi, one Coke. "This is Coke,"
I said. "This is Pepsi, yuck; I like Coke." Something like that. "Thank
you," she said, and sent me on my way. My husband, who prefers Coke to Pepsi,
happened to be thirsty: "This is Pepsi, it tastes better," he said, and was
promptly given a free cup of cold Pepsi. I don't think the results of either
survey were valid. I think it was a Roper survey, but I wouldn't swear to it.
In my mind, Catholicism represents true Fundamentalism, whereas
"fundamentalists," as they are called, represents a fringe group of
Christianity. My husband, who is Protestant, told me he thinks the exact
opposite is the opinion of most Americans. I say it's the opinion of most
Protestants. Am I right? I'm curious how other Catholics (Roman, Anglican,
or Orthodox) on the Net think about current usage of the term Fundamentalist.
Answer 1, 2 or 3:
1. Catholic beliefs and practices represent true Fundamental Christianity.
2. Mainstream Protestant beliefs and practices represent true Fundamental
Christianity.
3. "Fundamentalist" (so-called) beliefs and practices represent true
Fundamental Christianity.
This isn't a survey, per se, I'm just curious if you too are fed up with the
term "fundamentalist." With the way it's used in application to Christians,
God only knows what the media means by "Islamic Fundamentalists." As OFM
notes, however, media attitude is often negative.
--
Sincerely,
Cindy Smith
_///_ // SPAWN OF A JEWISH _///_ //
_///_ // <`)= _<< CARPENTER _///_ //<`)= _<<
<`)= _<< _///_ // \\\ \\ \\ _\\\_ <`)= _<< \\\ \\
\\\ \\ <`)= _<< >IXOYE=('> \\\ \\
\\\ \\_///_ // // /// _///_ // _///_ //
emory!dragon!cms <`)= _<< _///_ // <`)= _<< <`)= _<<
\\\ \\<`)= _<< \\\ \\ \\\ \\
GO AGAINST THE FLOW! \\\ \\ A Real Live Catholic in Georgiacca04@keele.ac.uk (P.J. Mitchell) (07/20/90)
From article <Jul.18.05.02.16.1990.16144@athos.rutgers.edu>, by cms@dragon.uucp: As a Methodist (Protestant) it is my understanding that the use of terms like fundamentalist, conservative and liberal are based upon the view taken of Biblical interpretation. As such there can be Catholics of all the above persuations (and I know some). I would define the three terms something along the lines of, Fundamentalist. =============== One who believes the Bible to be completely and literally true, and therefore inerrant and non-contradictory. This having been achieved by the direct action (inspiration) of the Holy Spirit upon the Biblical authors. Fundamentalists tend to see the Bible literally as the word of God, and therefore all parts equally valid. Conservative. ============= One who believes the action of the Holy Spirit upon the authors of the Bible renders all of it useful for teaching and guidance etc, but not necessarily inerrant as such. Convervatives view the Bible as divine revelation/information, if not a verbatim quote. So parts of the Bible may be considered allegorical, but not discarded. Liberal. ======== One who believes that the Bible must be treated like all other documents because it was written by fallible humans. Liberals claim this does not detract from the importance of the Bible, but view it as the recorded experience, attitudes and wisdom of the faithfull over several millenia. Hence any percived differences are either errors (original or documentary) or simply reflect humanity's changing view of God over the years. The theology espoused by people in these categories is presumably moulded by their view of scripture and their interpretation of it. However, there is of course still scope for many different interpertations within all of these definitions, and plenty of overlap. I hope that this is informative rather than obscuring. -- --Paul Mitchell (CMA N.Cheshire, DoD#0145) | Computer Centre, JANET: cca04@uk.ac.keele.seq1 | University of Keele, Keele, USENET: cca04@seq1.keele.ac.uk@nss.cs.ucl.ac.uk | Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, U.K. BITNET: cca04%seq1.keele.ac.uk@ukacrl | 0782 - 621111 ext 3302
morrow@uunet.uu.net ( config) (07/24/90)
In article <Jul.18.05.02.16.1990.16144@athos.rutgers.edu> cms@dragon.uucp writes: > >> >1. Catholic beliefs and practices represent true Fundamental Christianity. > >2. Mainstream Protestant beliefs and practices represent true Fundamental > Christianity. > >3. "Fundamentalist" (so-called) beliefs and practices represent true > Fundamental Christianity. > > This isn't a survey, per se, I'm just curious if you too are fed up with the >term "fundamentalist." With the way it's used in application to Christians, >God only knows what the media means by "Islamic Fundamentalists." As OFM >notes, however, media attitude is often negative. > Today's society seems to be "hooked" on titles and names. In some ways, the term "Fundamentalist" is to generic to be applicable when one is considering the many different sects and denominations which are prevalent today (especially in North America). I always considered "Pentacostals" and "Fundamentalist" to be one and the same. Imagine my confusion when "Evangelical Pentacostals" and "Fundamentalist Pentacostals" started sniping at one another. "Catholic" means "conservative". By this definition, I would include "mainline" churches such as Presbyterian. Methodist and Baptist. If you will notice, I've used alot of quotation marks in just over nine lines. Titles and names. Whether or not a particular denomination fo the Christian Church represents true "Fundamentalism" is, IMHO, impossible to debate as each group, by vitue of their existence, must believe that they are "fundamentally" "catholic" in their theology and liturgy. It all depends on the teachings of the churches. BOB