Download The Problem IS Fundamentalism: Christian OR Muslim

The Problem IS Fundamentalism: Christian OR Muslim
Here's a definition of fundamentalism: “...patriarchy gone berserk.”1
I prefer another: “Fundamentalism derives from a profound fear of thinking.” 2
That's because fundamentalism “offers the false hope of faith without ambiguity.”3
In a quantum physics world of flux and relativity, such a claim is unrealistic and unsustainable.
We could dissect such arrogance or naivety within either psychological or sociological categories,
but I wish to begin with explaining Christian and Islamic fundamentalism as a theological problem.
J
udaism, Christianity, and Islam distinguish themselves from each other with an intensity rooted,
paradoxically, in their symbolic and structural similarities. This intensity is fueled, as in a vacuum, by
the absence of any culturally challenging alternative, 4 such as polytheism or even a robust atheism. In
effect, monotheism has been so successful that true believers have to seek deeper to assert their faith's
truth—thus, “witnessing unto death.”
Each monotheistic tradition is grounded in the
notion that God communicates His will to specially
selected founders of communities established in His
name.5 Because this mandate takes place in history
and within community, stanch believers elevate
religion to the center of the public arena. Common to
each community of believers is a carefully cultivated
memory that defines its identity and mission.6
1. For Jews, the liberation from Egyptian
servitude and the call for a covenant at
Sinai defined the Judaic community.
2. For Christians, the spirit of prophecy assumed from Christ’s resurrection
transformed a fragment of disciples into a unified church.
3. For Muslims, the move by Muhammad and his followers to Medina was the
historical marker for the community as a model of Islam.
As the result of God’s unique “self-disclosure” to each community, the faithful embark on a mission to
bring all of humanity into proper moral relationship with God’s will.7 Initially, the struggle to succeed is
internal, while the community purges its own flaws; after retrieving and fortifying the traditional faith, the
community then promotes an absolute form and practice.8 At that point, the struggle becomes external in
resistance to or aggression against other communities of faith. Ironically, a jealous belief in one God’s love
often translates into a human capacity for hate.
In Judaic, Christian, and Islamic terms, the mission of each to fulfill God’s will is intended to
culminate in an “eschatological victory”—triumph in the end—which entails either incorporating
historical opponents or completely annihilating them. Monotheism’s preoccupation with a community’s
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Matthew Fox, The Coming of the Cosmic Christ (New York: Harper & Row, 1980), pg. 27.
Donald B. Cozzens, The Changing Face of the Priesthood (Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 2000), quoting Timothy Radcliffe, O.P., “The
Wellspring of Hope,” International Dominican Information, No. 337, January 1996.
Ibid.
Martin S. Jaffee, “One God, One Revelation, One People: On the Symbolic Structure of Elective Monotheism,” Journal of the American
Academy of Religion, vol. 69, no. 4, December 2001.., pg. 757.
Ibid., pg. 758.
Ibid., pg. 759.
Ibid., pg. 760.
R. Scott Appleby, "The God Squads," Notre Dame Magazine, Summer 1995, pg. 36.
S.T. Harty
The Problem of Fundamentalism: Christian and Muslim
Page 2
“redemptive drama” through history is built explicitly on the assumption of necessary conflict and battle
with others who reject its God.9 Thus, a potential for violence is inherent in monotheistic religion.10
AMERICAN FUNDAMENTALISM
he roots of Christian fundamentalism in America are late 19th century. There was no one founder and no
specific instigating event. Although influenced by the rise of millennialism at the turn of the century,
fundamentalism was actually a movement of withdrawal from mainstream Protestantism. It was a defensive
reaction to the modernizing trends of secularism, humanism, and liberalism. It was also a defining act
against the rise of strange Christian expressions, such as Mormonism and Christian Science.
T
The term “fundamentalism” was coined in 1920 by the editor11 of a Baptist newspaper12 as a rallying
cry for conservative Protestants. The basic elements of fundamentalism were formulated earlier at
Princeton Theological Seminary where conservatives Protestants consolidated their positions in the
escalating battle with liberals. Thus, fundamentalists called themselves "defenders of orthodoxy." They
identified five doctrines of their faith as “fundamental” tests of orthodoxy.13
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
inerrancy and infallibility of scripture (as the literal word of God);
divinity of Jesus, including a virgin birth (proof he was no mere mortal);
substitutionary atonement on the cross (or Jesus died for our sins);
Jesus’ physical resurrection from the dead; and
bodily return of Christ to earth in his “second coming.”
Islam and Christianity share a belief in the virgin birth, the second coming, and the inerrancy of
scripture. Islam and Christianity also share a theology of "last days" (death, Satan, judgment, heaven and
hell), but not of original sin. Islam does not accept an inherent need for atonement.
These Christian fundamentals were set out in a series of tracts or pamphlets. This tractarian movement
is what became "Fundamentalism" as defined by those “who mean to do battle for the fundamentals.”14
Committed Christian executives of the Union Oil Company of California bankrolled this proselytizing
effort by publishing 300,000 copies of each fundamental for distribution. Anyone who did not accept
these five doctrines was considered a heretic.
Other lesser fundamentals included a literal belief in heaven and hell, a personal Satan, and miracles.
Oddly, “creationism” was not among these fundamentals. That didn’t become a test of orthodoxy until the
late 20th century. Then, creationism became more than a protest against Social Darwinism; it became the
basis of a social agenda intently defensive of a patriarchal family. That’s an agenda that Christian
fundamentalism shares with Islamic fundamentalism.
In that context, Christian fundamentalism seeks to regiment the personal and social lives of its
adherents—from prohibiting smoking, drinking, gambling, and dancing while encouraging bible study,
youth groups, weekday services, and weekend outings. This full-scale control of others’ lives fits the
patriarchal model—the father lays down the law.
9 Ibid., pg. 773.
10 Martin S. Jaffee,
11
12
13
14
“One God, One Revelation, One People: On the Symbolic Structure of Elective Monotheism,” Journal of the American
Academy of Religion, vol. 69, no. 4, December 2001.
George M. Marsden Fundamentalism and American Culture: The Shaping of 20 th Century Evangelicalism (Oxford 1980).
Curtis Lee Law, The Watchman Examiner, July 1, 1920.
The Niagara Bible Conference of 1895.
Gabriel Herbert, Fundamentalism and the Church (Philadelphia PA: Westminster Press, 1957).
S.T. Harty
The Problem of Fundamentalism: Christian and Muslim
Page 3
In further characterizing such a mindset, one could point to the discomfort some feel in a world
escalating outside their control. It often manifests by aggressively suppressing others. However, most
fundamentalist congregations are characterized by:15
• limited education of the clergy,
• lower economic class of believers,
• unpretentious meeting places,
• unsophisticated or unconventional theology, and
• intense emotional fervor.
Thus, many who are “marginal” in society—the poor and uneducated or insecure egos—seek the
supportive scaffolding of a fundamentalist faith.16 The certitude of fundamentalism is a consolation for the
illiterate, the uneducated, or the unread, because they lack the resources to think these things through.
Without the intellectual vigor to discern emerging truths, American Christian fundamentalism was
predominantly a rejection of:
• The Social Gospel, which emphasized economic justice;
• Darwinian Evolution, which eclipsed the Creator God; and
• Higher Biblical Criticism, which undermined divine revelation.
A PLANETARY PHENOMENON
F
undamentalism, however, is a planetary phenomenon today. The quest for security and certainty
among religious people is rooted in a deep-seated fear triggered by modernity, globalization, and the
breakup of cultural and family traditions.17 Yet, various fundamentalist movements around the world are
reactions to different forms of modernity and culture, so they differ from each other as well as from the
historical roots of their own traditions.
Still, each fundamentalist movement claims to be the sole authentic representative of its faith tradition
in its purest traditional form. Yet these movements are actually modern byproducts of the religious crisis
of the 20th century. Those who have God at the center of their lives tend to lose touch with modern life,
and those who are at the center of modern life tend to lose touch with God. The instability of this
dissonance fuels the religious discord.18
Predictably, those who best fit the term "fundamentalist" reject it, but their objection makes a point.
An American might ask: "How can you use the same label for law-abiding, Bible-believing Christians as
you use for Middle Eastern terrorists?"19 Or an Arab might say: "How can you use the word
'fundamentalist' to describe radical Islamists; you're reinforcing their arrogance in claiming proprietary
rights to Islamic truth."20 Indeed, the term has been broadly applied to acts and attitudes, such as:21
• Hindus who tore down the Muslim mosque in India,
• Buddhists who harassed the Hindu minority in Sri Lanka,
• Jews who insist on the land of their Arab neighbors,
• Muslims who want to enforce Islamic law on everyone, and
• Christians whose elitist standards will "leave behind" everyone else to rot in hell,
Indeed, the violence inherent in monotheism pits different kinds of fundamentalists against each
other. This dissension is especially volatile when religious fundamentalism combines with some form of
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
W. Seward Salisbury, Religion in American Culture: A Sociological Interpretation (The Dorsey Press, 1964), pg. 445.
Peggy Shriver, “Guardians of Fundamentalism’s Fortress,” New Catholic World, Jan/Feb 1985, pg. 15.
Fox, pg. 27.
Karen Armstrong, A History of God (New York: Ballantine Books, 1993), pg. 368.
Abbleby, pg. 38.
Ibid.
Harvey Cox, Fire from Heaven: The Rise of Pentecostal Spirituality (Menlo Park CA: Addison-Wesley, 1995), pg. 302.
S.T. Harty
The Problem of Fundamentalism: Christian and Muslim
Page 4
nationalism.22 In fact, fundamentalism prospers where patriotism and religion combine. When
fundamentalism emerges in socially disorganized regions, a civic vacuum also fuels this dynamic. In that
setting, fundamentalism’s most dangerous aspect is its claim on absolute truth, which has the power to
seduce the young, the dispossessed, and the dispirited.
So how to distinguish fundamentalism from zealous piety? It’s in the extremes. Fundamentalists:
• respond to a perceived crisis threatening them,
• interpret the crisis as a cosmic war between good and evil,
• emphasize selective doctrines from their faith system,
• withdraw from mainstream society into a counterculture, and
• follow a charismatic leader who provides a plan of action.
That’s my segue into Islamic fundamentalism. Osama bin Laden, a rich Saudi, chose Afghanistan. He
used the vulnerability of a geographically isolated culture, where a majority are poor and illiterate, in
order to serve his political agenda.
ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISM
he term for "fundamentalism" in Arabic23 refers to the “study of sources.” For Muslims, that means the
Qur’an, the Shari’ah (Islamic law), and the Hadiths (traditions of Muhammad). As such, all good
Muslims are fundamentalists, but that's misleading. All Muslims do not conform to a homogenous brand of
Islam. We must make distinctions. Within Christian fundamentalism, we recognize evangelicals, adventists,
charismatics, revivalists, pentecostals, creationists, millennialists, anti-abortionists, nazi-skinheads, and the
arian nation. Similarly, Islam has variations, influenced predominantly by the pre-Islamic culture of each country.
T
1. The great majority of Muslims worldwide want to:
 preserve their religious and cultural identity,
 reapply the divine law eclipsed by European legal codes during colonialism,
 draw all Muslims together into a transnational community of faith.
This is TRADITIONALISM rather than fundamentalism.
Renewal, Revival, and Resurgence better characterize such groups.
2
Other more political Islamic movements seek to:
 apply strict Islamic law in all aspects of life,
 oppose Western encroachment in their personal and political lives, and
 repress as well the intellectual, artistic, and mystical traditions of Islam.24
These movements are PURITANICAL rather than fundamentalist and are largely peaceful.
Reform, Activism, and even Radicalism better characterize these groups.
3. Some more virulent Islamic factions more closely fit the fearful stereotype as:25
 fiercely opposed to the West, despite aggressive use of modern technology,
 armed and trained in battle tactics and strategies, and
 violent against Western interests and values in a narrow interpretation of jihad.
These movements are MILITANT not fundamentalist.
Revolution, Extremism, and Terrorism accurately characterize these Islamic groups.
22
23
24
25
Armstrong..
Usuluyyah.
Wahhabiism in Saudi Arabia, Salafiyyah in Syria and Egypt, Muhammadiyyah in Indonesia, Ikhwan al-Muslimin in Egypt and Sudan, and
Jamaat-I Islami in Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh.
Revolts such as in Iran, Lebanon, Palestine, Egypt, Sudan, and Afghanistan.
S.T. Harty
The Problem of Fundamentalism: Christian and Muslim
Page 5
So what we broadly refer to as Islamic fundamentalism needs to be perceived more subtly as either
traditional, puritanical, or militant.
My main point is that Christian fundamentalism in America has more in common with Islamic
fundamentalism around the world than either of these extremes have to do with others—even within their
own religious tradition. Fundamentalists are conservative literalists who are defensive of their religious
traditions against encroachments from modernity, secularism, and globalization. In that sense, all
fundamentalists are mental adolescents, since acceptance of a modern theological worldview, including a
historical-critical analysis of scripture, requires intellectual maturity.
Monotheism has been interpreted as a “moral advance.”26 But the transcendent universalism implicit
in monotheism is constantly negated by a powerful and immensely attractive countervailing element. That
is, a zealous community of believers who claim a “warrant” as God’s obedient faithful to hate and fight
those with other beliefs. In sum, fundamentalism is a mandate for conversion by force. It is an adamant
refusal to search for cooperation and understanding with the rest of us.
© Copyright, Sheila Harty, 2007.
Sheila Harty is a published and award-winning writer with a BA and MA in Theology. Her major was in Catholicism, her minor in Islam, and her
thesis in scriptural Judaism. Harty employed her theology degrees in the political arena as “applied ethics,” working for 20 years in Washington
DC as a public interest policy advocate, including ten years with Ralph Nader. On sabbatical from Nader, she taught “Business Ethics” at
University College Cork, Ireland. In DC, she also worked for U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, former U.S. Surgeon General C. Everett
Koop, the World Bank, the United Nations University, the Congressional Budget Office, and the American Assn for the Advancement of
Science. She was a consultant with the Centre for Applied Studies in International Negotiations in Geneva, the National Adult Education Assn in
Dublin, and the International Organization of Consumers Unions in Penang, Malaysia. Her first book, Hucksters in the Classroom, won the 1980
George Orwell Award for Honesty & Clarity in Public Language. She moved to St. Augustine, Florida, in 1996 to care for her aging parents,
where she works freelance in editing, graphics design, and desktop publishing. She is also an adjunct faculty with Saint Leo University. She can
be reached by phone at 904 / 826-0563 or by e-mail at s t h a r t y@ b e l l s o u t h . n e t . Her website is h t t p : w w w . s h e i l a - t - h a r t y. c o m
26
Jaffee, pg. 773.