Do you regard "fundamentalist Catholic" as a contradiction in terms?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

"Fundamentalism" originally referred to a specific stream of Chrisian thought; it now seems to be used rather differently, more like "ultra-orthodox hardline".

Would you use the word to refer to an orthodox hardliner of a stream of Christianity very much in opposition to fundamentalism?

If so, how would you refer to "genuine" fundamentalism?
If not, would you refer to e.g. "fundamentalism Islam"?

[xchrom]

1. indeed. nt

[rug]

2. What is a "fundamentalist Catholic"?

[aristocles]

3. An example of real Christian Fundamentalism

This week an ad for the web site "God Said Man Said" began running on local radio.
http://www.godsaidmansaid.com.

Here's their explanation of the difference between the right and the left:

It's amazing to me that Satan names the righteous correctly...that the accusations against the saints all have a smattering of truth if not sound truth...that his products are also labeled with relevance and that mankind is oblivious to it. For example, Satan's name for those who have embraced Christ through the born again experience is the "religious right." The name tag is accurate. Jesus Christ sits on the right hand of the Father. In the final days of judgment the Lord separates the sheep from the goats. The sheep represent the blood washed and are placed on the right with eternal life in Christ Jesus while the goats are placed on the left and have everlasting judgment. The term "religious right" also means "right" as in "correct." The name for those contrary to Jesus Christ is the "left" and when the Lord returns for the righteous (those doing right) the "left" will be left behind to eternal damnation. The tag "religious right" is accurate.

One of Satan's accusations against the saints is that we are uneducated and easily led. This is an accurate assessment. We have cast off our unbelieving pseudo analytic minds as so much dung and with childlike faith embraced the beautiful truth of holiness and follow the great shepherd as obedient sheep. Uneducated and easily led? Yes!

Blood bought, word committed Christians are called narrow-minded. Those who embrace truth must be narrow-minded. Truth is singular. Truth sits alone. It will not tolerate compromise. If it does it is no longer truth. When hot is mixed with cold it is no longer hot. It has become lukewarm and God spits that out of his mouth.

[OHdem10]

4. The Catholic Church has two groups--Liberals and Conservatives

At the present time Conservatives seem to dominate.

It is not uncommon to hear Conservative Catholics
called Fundamentalist Catholics. Especially after
the rise of Christian Fundamentalism and how the
two have joined forces.

[toddaa]

5. Fundamentalist: A person unimpressed with your ability to remain undecided

[ZombieHorde]

6. The word "fundamentalist" is loosing its meaning.

Religiously speaking, fundamentalists are Protestants who believe the Holy Bible is an accurate description of history.

[trotsky]

7. Anyone who thinks that there are "fundamentalist atheists"...

must necessarily believe there are "fundamentalist Catholics." (Of course, they must also believe that there are fundamentalist Democrats, fundamentalist volunteers, and fundamentalist stamp collectors.)

[Donald Ian Rankin]

9. I'm not sure there are *non*-fundamentalist atheists.

In Christianity there's a continuum from "every word of the bible is literally true" to "some of it is true".

Atheism isn't a religion, it's a single religious belief which you either hold or you don't.


What there *are* different degrees of among atheists, obviously, is opposition or hostility to religion, from people who merely think it's mistaken to people who think it's stupid, and from people who think it's a force for good to people who think it's a force for evil. But I don't think those beliefs make one more or less atheistic. The guy who admires religion, wants to live in a theocracy for social reasons, but doesn't believe in a god themself is as much an atheist as the guy who despises all religion and dedicates their life to eradicating it.

[trotsky]

10. I am not aware of a single atheist who has...

"dedicate(d) their life to eradicating" religion. Not even the "fundie atheists" so often lambasted around here like Richard Dawkins. Dawkins is an evolutionary biologist. He hasn't dedicated his life to eradicating religion.

So I'm calling strawman, unless you can present an actual atheist that fits your caricature.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

11. I am not aware of any atheists who want to live in a theocracy either, if it comes to that...

Care to "call strawman" on that one too?

A straw man, incidentally, is an argument that one puts forwards oneself under the guise of it being an opponent's position, and then refutes, but which is not actually believed by that opponent. So it's not the appropriate idiom to use here.

[trotsky]

12. So you created two completely fictional people to illustrate what, exactly?

Seems to me you manufactured your strawman in order to refute the position that there are no "fundamentalist" atheists.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

13. Possible extremes of attitudes to religion.

But, you may notice, what I actually argued was that position on this axis *didn't* make one more or less an atheist - I'm not quite sure where you got the idea that I was using them to "refute the position that there are no fundamentalist atheists" from...

Also, you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means...

[trotsky]

14. I'll let you go back to writing your works of fiction then.

Hopefully you can flesh out these imaginary characters and come up with a good plot!

[Silent3]

8. Even very conservative Catholics usually aren't typically Biblical literalists...

...however. Not that there are any strict definitions to go by, but I generally consider Biblical literalism (or at least the self-made claim of it, never mind the frequent inconsistencies) an important hallmark of what I think of as Christian fundamentalism. "Catholic Fundamentalist" strikes me as a bit off-sounding.

[markpkessinger]

15. The definition of "Fundamentalist" has changed over time

It's important to consider the origin of the term.

Among conservative protestant evangelicals in the late 19th and early 20th Centuries, a movement arose to resist a perceived, encroaching "modernism," particularly in seminaries and universities, which sought to find a way to integrate Christian spiritual teaching with the insights of the sciences, and of new approaches to history and literary criticism. The origin of the term "fundamentalist" comes from a position paper adopted by the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in 1910, which set forth what they considered to be the five defining, or fundamental, beliefs of the Christian faith. They were: (1) the literal inerrancy of the Bible, including the doctrine of Sola Scriptura, which holds that the Bible contained all things necessary to salvation and that it was the Christian faith's primary source of authority to which all other sources of authority were to be subject; (2) a literal belief in the virgin birth of Jesus, (3) the doctrine of substitutionary atonement, (4) the bodily resurrection of Jesus, and (5) the imminent personal return of Jesus.

I think it's pretty safe to say that there are some glaring conflicts with Roman Catholic doctrine. The Roman Catholic Church by that time had long since abandoned the concept of the literal inerrancy of the Bible, and viewed the Church, not the Bible, as the primary source of authority for Christians. But over time, the term has broadened, and while still primarily referring to Christian evangelicals, it is sometimes used in describing other groups who are seen as rigidly adhering to a particular set of religious writings and allowing for no flexibility for interpreting them through the lens of a modern context. Thus we now hear references to "fundamentalist Islam," for example.

I think, when people try to use the terms to describe Roman Catholics, what they are really talking about is a strain of very conservative, inflexible legalism that exists in some corners of the Roman Catholic Church. These folks are indeed quite rigid in their beliefs and their approach, not unlike protestant fundamentalists, but if you are going to use "fundamentalist" to describe them, it's probably a good idea to be aware that they are distinct from those who are traditionally called by that term.