My Dad Was a Fundamentalist
Labels are such tricky things, and any linguist is aware of the problems of saying that a word should mean some certain thing. So I’m going to resist that. But it would be nice to have a label for people who were very firm about the tenets of their faith, and yet was not also a pejorative term.
More and more, “fundamentalist” is used in a pejorative sense. You can be an evangelical Christian, and you might be considered a reasonable person. A little over pious, perhaps, but reasonable. But fundamentalist now carries the connotation of Westboro Baptist protesting at funerals, suicide bombers, and planes flying into buildings. Most fundamentalists I know, whether Christian or Muslim, don’t think the actions of those groups. You even have the term “fundamentalist atheist” for atheists who are firm in expressing their beliefs and don’t give in to anyone else.
On one online forum in which I participated, the common standard was to use “fundamentalist” of the person’s basic beliefs, but to call someone who was also over the line in terms of behavior a “fundy.” It didn’t always work. In fact, it rarely worked, because a pejorative label is unlikely to be received well by anyone.
Now my dad was, in terms of beliefs, a fundamentalist Christian. He believed literally in all the major doctrines–virgin birth, resurrection, a literal and imminent second coming of Jesus, the complete truth of the Bible, a literal and recent reading of the Genesis creation story, and salvation by faith alone in Christ alone. He didn’t waver from any of those believes.
He was also a medical doctor who spent his life serving others. He never made the kind of money that one expects of a physician. He never intended to nor did he try to. He put his effort into serving. He made no distinctions of religion, race, or nationality (or of any other kind that I know of) in the people he served. He treated everyone with the sort of respect that must be part of one’s nature; it’s not put on, so it never slips. He fit none of the stereotypes of a fundamentalist.
I disagree with some of the religious positions my father held, but I have a profound respect for his faith, his service, and the way he dealt with people. I’m deeply grateful to have grown up under that influence. When I call my father a fundamentalist, I mean no disrespect whatsoever. Yet the term carries that disrespect, and at the same time, I know no other the fully reflects his beliefs.
Language changes, and is nearly impossible to turn from its course. I wonder if I should try to rescue the term “fundamentalist” so as to make it descriptive rather than pejorative, but I doubt I’d succeed. Perhaps I just need to write something like this every so often, to remind people that “fundamentalist” is not a synonym either for “terrorist” or “idiot.”
As someone who is distinctly non-fundamentalist, perhaps I’m a good person to make that statement.
Henry, This is a very thoughtful post. I appreciate it.
I have to ask, which of these doctrines would you say you disagree with? “virgin birth, resurrection, a literal and imminent second coming of Jesus, the complete truth of the Bible, a literal and recent reading of the Genesis creation story, and salvation by faith alone in Christ alone. ” – from my reading, the only one that is not required of just regular orthodox Christianity is the literal and recent reading of the Genesis creation story… thank for the conversation… again, appreciate the post…
Good points. I did think of the issue you raise, but I would note that I have been called fundamentalist myself, even though there is substantial reason why I don’t fit with that label. I note that there are numerous list of the major five fundamentals, and they don’t all agree. I haven’t researched to see which is most historical. Other alternatives include the authenticity of the miracles and a premillenial second advent.
For me, the hard part comes in the definitions. For example, I affirm the truth of scripture, but I would differ in just how scripture conveys truth. My dad would never have accepted the idea that the books of Jonah or Job might be fiction. I would have no problem with a fictional book being a medium to convey truth. This is not asserting error in scripture; rather, I’m suggesting that truth is conveyed through a different type of literature in that case.
On the issue of a literal creation week, however, I differ profoundly with my father’s position. I can loosely be called a theistic evolutionist, in the same sense I might be called a “theistic gravitationist.” I believe all laws in nature function because God so will it, whether it is the attraction between bodies, or the process of evolution diversifying life.
Perhaps fundamentalist has become such a pejorative term term because a few imfamous people (on both the Christian and Muslim side) have become zeolots, willing to kill or sacrafice themselves for their beliefs. They see others as less than human, or at least less than themselves. I think we can usually accept another beliefs, but its hard to accept the actions of those that justify hate and cruelty with their reigion.
Obviously your dad was not an extremist like this. It’s too bad that more people could not have learned from his example.
I think I do understand how it happens, but is this not the standard mode of stereotyping? Something bad is done by someone from an easily identifiable group, and over time we start to label the whole group with that action.
In some cases it doesn’t become wholly identified with the group, but in the case of fundamentalism, for many, it seems to me, simply calling someone a fundamentalist is equivalent to calling that person a terrorist (or headed in that direction).
I have been thinking about this for days. Wrote a whole reply and my computer wiped it out. Then yesterday on faceback my cousin’s daughter posted a comment. And the comments to her comments just seemed to speak to this issue. And I think the problem is that we don’t have nice little cubbie holes into which to classify people or their actions. It’s more of a continuum from libral to moderate to fundamental to extreme to terrorist. Where is the line drawn between them? Especially when the media sensationalizes both extremes?
I don’t think having sincere and passionate feelings about your beliefs or faith is wrong whether you are libral or conservation, Christian or Muslim. Thinking that these beliefs or faiths are more important than God’s children that don’t share them IS.
I am including the posts below just as am example of a very small part of a very big problem.
Laura
This is sick. Really, SoDak? REALLY?!
South Dakota Moves To Legalize Killing Abortion Providers | Mother Jones
m.motherjones.com
A bill under consideration in the Mount Rushmore State would make preventing harm to a fetus a “justifiable homicide” in many cases…
Yesterday at 8:50am ·LikeUnlike · · Share.
Nicole Oh my word! WTF is wrong with people??? This is deplorable!
Yesterday at 9:04am · LikeUnlike.
Sean And it’s not just one nut-job state rep.! It cleared committee and “[the bill] is cosponsored by 22 other state representatives and four state senators. ”
Yesterday at 9:10am · LikeUnlike
.Nicole I think the abortion providers should start carrying weapons and shoot the damn gun men on site.
Yesterday at 9:10am · LikeUnlike.
Alyssa Dyar Wow. It’s hard to believe there are people that find this reasonable.
Yesterday at 9:12am · LikeUnlike
.Laura I know!! My family there seem so sane, but I keep reading about this crazy ass crap that is legislated there (requiring gun ownership?!) and just feel grateful I didn’t grow up there.
Yesterday at 9:13am · LikeUnlike
.Alaina I promise we all don’t think like the crazy people making up these proposed bills!
20 hours ago · LikeUnlike.
Mark Would “preventing harm to a human” mean I could just go start shooting Republicans there?
18 hours ago · LikeUnlike.
Ashley Are you suprised? Our state has gone crazy.
17 hours ago · LikeUnlike
.Penny These are the same crazy ass people that heckle the family at soldier’s funerals. Somehow they think that God has told them the truth and they need to force that on the rest of us. I think it’s great that we all have different opinions and faiths; but when are they going to realize that two wrongs don’t make a right? My mom taught that to me in kindergarten!
12 hours ago · LikeUnlike
.Penny Faith… must be enforced by reason… when faith becomes blind it dies.
–Mohandas Gandhi
12 hours ago · LikeUnlike.
Nicole @Mark, love the idea!
8 hours ago · LikeUnlike.
Nicole Wouldn’t that classify these people as terrorists? They’re infringing on the constitutional rights of others via the use of terror. I can just imagine it, shoot out at an abortion clinic.
8 hours ago · LikeUnlike
.Penny @Nicole, you are so right. Extremists, no matter their ideology and that kill for their believes, are terrorists.
It’s me writing again… What people see is the legitimization of violence to further Fundamentalist beliefs, not Fundamentalist decrying the use of violence as the acts of just a few crock-pots. Whole states seem to be saying that violence is ok as long as it goes in line with their religious beliefs of the majority.
One of the problems has been with a confusion about what is historical orthodox Christianity. When I think of the Articles of Religion of the UMC and the Apostles Creed and Nicene Creed, I just think, “This is simple historical orthodox Christianity.” Yet some would say that if you take the Articles of Religion at face value then you are a fundamentalist. How I wish that we UMC folks could agree to just accept our Articles of Religion as states without any mysterious hidden meanings, and say, “This is what we believe.” It would eliminate confusion, allow freedom on side matters, and prevent derrogatory labeling.