How God loves everyone, even those with no clue...
Now, I know how everyone loves to bash Christian Fundamentalists for various reasons and, quite frankly, I get sick of it. There are a few reasons why I am sick of it, although it is debateable whether I will get into them in this article.
First and foremost, I am not a Fundamentalist. Although (I use that word a lot) the term "Fundamentalist" is used for every religion and is hardly used in a positive way, I wish that society could separate the emotionally-laden term for a more objective, neutral term. It can be an effective rhetorical tool though (I like that word too). I am guilty of accusing people of being "Fundamentalist" too, and for that, I need to be more careful in the future, for the Church can defend herself through reason.
In this article, I wish to discuss the (uniquely?) American brand of Protestant, Christian Fundamentalism. Now, as Christianity Today recently claimed, Evangelicals (of whom Fundamentalists are usually classified as) are more favourable towards His Holiness than either Jerry Fallwell or Pat Robertson. If this is true, the media needs to pick up on this. Of course, with the wide-spread and growing movement of Evangelicals, any point of commonality and respect should be fostered. Though I have some severe reservations about the whole movement (let alone their third world "flock stealing") they are my brothers and sisters in Christ and I have no problems with them as persons. In fact, I am a member of a broadly Protestant (with strong Evangelical leanings) young adult group that attempts to live the Gospel more fully. May God bless their hearts (and mine as well). Love can do amazing things...
Yet, this paper is more about what annoys me about Fundamentalists (forever now known as FD's because I am sick of typing it out). The term needs further definition. First, they stick to the "fundamentals" in two aspects, they believe that the Bible is the inerrent word of God, that it speaks about every aspect of life, and that salvation only comes from professing Jesus as Saviour. I may also include the phrase "asking Jesus into your heart," although I do not know what that means specifically. So, with these two broad definitions about what I mean by FDs, let us move onto what I disagree with them.
One, I think that they are addicted to not defining what they mean by "inerrent." I also believe that the Bible is the "Word of God," although I tend to be more cautious in making personal, individual claims about what the Bible actually teaches. The Bible, like people, is a very complex book. It was written from a certain perspective, by a certain people, with an intended meaning, at a particular time. I think that it is the habitiual nature of biblical interpretation of people to put on blinders that annoys me. When I read the Bible, I do the exact same thing, so I do not fault others for doing it. What I can fault is what I percieve to be spiritual pride in singular person's interpretation of Scripture. I firmly believe that the Bible, like the American Constitution, or any written word, is a "living" document. We should not interprete it literally all the time, for two reasons. First, not everythin in the Bible was meant to be interpreted literally, and I know of no one who claims that everything is literal. For example, the book of Revelation and many of the prophetic books. Second, we tend to impose our own concerns on to the text. Sodom and Gamorah is commonly cited as opposing homosexual unions, but from what I have read, there was probably more going on there than what is usually attributed. It was not only homosexualty. Another issue is the (common) interpretation that the Anti-Christ opposes America, or that America is the "good guy" in Revelations. Poppycock. American history is filled with horrid abuses and I do not see the tend stopping suddenly even though we have a "God-fearing" man in office. If anything, I cannot help but admit a small amount of America supporting whole-heartedly the anti-Christian regime that may be in place, although how or if it will happen is a mystery to me.
Two, the mixture of equating politics with religion is unfaithful to the Gospels. True, Jesus' message will necessarily transmit into politics because He came to set all things new, His Kingdom is "not of this world." As I am reading "Witness to Hope", the biography of JPII, I am coming to realize that there is another way to combat evil in this world. It is not the reactionary use of the sword, but the revolutionary way of the Cross. Only through personal conversion and redemption can society be changed. That is the goal of both the Catholic Church and the Evangelical movement, and may God unite the Church again. Yet, I digress. The doggish determination that Christians can only vote "Republican" frustrates me. Frankly, I want neither Bush nor Kerry in office. I am a economic leftist (for the most part) and a social conservative (for the most part). Talk about confusing the issue there Jiggles...
Three, I refuse to believe that people who cannot proclaim Christ as God in this life are necessarily damned. I cannot comment on the soul of Ghandi or the Dali Lama, I can only trust that they may be saved with the Church Suffering. I can only live by my convictions that Christ is God, I cannot make people see the truth of that statement. I can only hope that unbeliever's be saved and that we both will cry before God, "I am not worthy to be called Your son, forgive me Father, a Sinner." That is not to say that I am an inclusivist or that every religion leads to God, far from it. I am just admitting my agnosticism about certain individuals.
In conclusion, for all that is wrong with FD's, my prayer is that I may love them more fully; that I may be made humble and to recognize my own brokenness. As Christ said, to pluck my own log out before I remove their speck.