April 11, 2005
Will Fundamentalism Change?
Maybe more importantly, can fundamentalism change? What will prompt such?
The following Linden McNeilly article in April 9, 2005 edition of the Santa Cruz Sentinel explores this subject. Here are the opening paragraphs:
Following the road
Sanctuary at Garfield Park Christian Church challenges fundamentalism
Editor’s note: Post-election
news coverage may give the impression that the country’s churches are
ever-growing and increasingly powerful. But beneath the surface,
trouble is brewing in many mainline churches, and local pastors are
responding to the need for change. This
situation has stirred mainline Protestant churches — the Methodists,
Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Episcopalians — and drawn increased
attention to religiously conservative nondenominational Christian
fellowships.
By LINDEN McNEILLY
SENTINEL CORRESPONDENT
True or false? Fundamentalism is closer to early Christianity than progressive churches supporting modern social ideas.
The Rev. Steve’s answer: Decidedly false.
The Rev. Steve DeFields-Gambrel of
Sanctuary at Garfield Park Christian Church in Santa Cruz objects to
the notion that fundamentalism is somehow more faithful or biblical
than progressive Christianity. To that end he has been giving sermons
and leading weekly Bible studies classes entitled, "How Fundamentalism
Betrays the Bible."
"My goal is to retake the high
ground of biblical study. I’d like to demonstrate that a more
progressive approach is in fact a more biblical, historical and even a
more reverential approach to Scripture, as well as a more demanding
route," he says.
Jesus was all about reflection and
change, says DeFields-Gambrel. "If you’re convinced that the Scriptures
must always agree and can never be changed, then you just can’t hear
what Jesus is saying. This is why Jesus had an ongoing battle with the
Pharisees. They couldn’t hear God asking them to take new steps in
faith. The failure of the Pharisees and the failure of Christian
fundamentalism is an unwillingness to keep growing, to keep maturing in
faith, because that means change."
Though the label smacks of ancient
roots, Christian fundamentalism is relatively recent. It began at the
turn of the 20th century as a reaction to popular acceptance of
scientific ideas such as evolution and the theory of relativity.
The basic doctrines of
fundamentalism are the literal truth of the Bible, belief in the
Father-Son-Holy Spirit trinity, belief that every man and woman is born
sinful and requires God’s grace, and an acceptance of Jesus Christ as
the only way to heaven before Judgment Day.
DeFields-Gambrel believes
fundamentalism inevitably results in a harsh, unloving religion, just
the opposite of what Jesus intended. Jesus contradicted the Old
Testament plenty, he says.
"In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus
says he’s not here to abolish the law or the prophets, but six times in
a row he revises them," he maintains. "Jesus says, ‘You have heard that
it was said, "You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy." But I
say to you, "Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you." ’
That totally reverses both Psalms 139:21-22 and Leviticus 19:18."
Since early Christianity was a
grass-roots movement, it spread by word of mouth and personal
experience. There was no organized church, formal doctrine or text for
several hundred years after Jesus died.
The New Testament was still being
amended until 375, by which time it had been formally canonized by
religious authorities. Since then it has been translated, adapted and
rephrased.
"The scary thing about canonizing
is that it was done by committee," says DeFields-Gambrel. "Nowadays we
don’t respect many things done by committee."
Fundamentalist Christians take
exception to the notion of a changing faith. On the Christian Web site,
"The Gospel Way," David E. Pratte, a gospel preacher with the church of
Christ in Round Lake Beach, Ill., says "There is no middle ground. We
must accept the Bible as exactly what it claims to be: God’s verbally
inspired and infallible word. Or else we must reject it completely and
give it no weight of authority in our lives at all."
Yes, there is truth to the snootiness of
some non-believers but is there any less 'holier than thou-ness' emanating
from some of the believers? It is a knife that cuts both ways.
Accurately or not, the fundamental non-secularists were lauded for
tipping the recent presidential election to George Bush and the
mainstream media gorged on the electoral results, resulting in a litany
of articles and commentaries, castigating both individuals possessing a
private religious persona but especially secularists,with
a one word message: change. A complex electoral issue was simply dumbed
down to this prescription: quote Scripture and always wear your
religion on your sleeve.
But it seems that for many, becoming a
Christian (or for that matter any religious faith) eliminates any
further questioning, which inhabits further spiritual and personal
growth. With apologies to Paul Simon and "Me And Julio Down By The
Schoolyard," and with one very important word deleted from his lyrics:
"...I'm on my way, I (don't) know where I'm going..." is the spiritual
end-all be-all.
The by now famous line: 'with us or agin' us' uttered by President
Bush addressing supporting or fighting terrorism is a primordial
example of this black-and-white, no- nuance-allowed, line drawn in the sand, way of thinking.
It's closure comfortable for some but a 'don't-confuse-me-with-the-facts'
religious/political/social mindset is indefensible.
My question to those Christians who feel called out here: what would
have happened if each inhabitant of the Roman Empire evidenced a
similar reaction to Jesus and his claims that you do to anything that
questions your mindset?
top
RSS feed
|