Can a Catholic be a Fundamentalist?

[Judas_Thaddeus]

:Are you saying that the Catholic Church does not believe that God created the world, that Adam and Eve did not reside in the garden of Eden, that Noah did not build the ark under the direction of God, that the flood did not occur ? Thus saying we believe in parts of Genesis but not all ? Wow, I must take a much closer look at this church I belong to.

No no no…
Every story in Genesis is True, but literal is another matter.
God is the Creator, Man does have a soul,
etc, but we’re missing the point of Genesis!
Read now HUMANI GENERIS to better understand.

I also recommend this link: Christian apologetics 1: Genesis

 

[VanSensei]

Sadly, you can be Catholic and Fundamentalist.

This website, for example, is one of those. Claims any non-Catholics (by their definition, any one who participates in a OF Mass or is Protestant) praying violates the First Commandment.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

They can have that fundamentalist attitude as anyone of any persuasion have.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

I am pleased with the way the Church has beautifully stated in just a few words in Dei Verbum, that
It is clear, therefore, that sacred tradition, Sacred Scripture and the teaching authority of the Church, in accord with God’s most wise design, are so linked and joined together that one cannot stand without the others, and that all together and each in its own way under the action of the one Holy Spirit contribute effectively to the salvation of souls. (Ch. II, 10.
To summarize your question, then, yes … any extreme that narrows just one point of these three essentials can fall into the description of fundamentalism.

I am fundamentalistically hard headed .

How you like my 20 letters word?

Peace,

 

[andrewstx]

Absolutely, I’d say there are a number of folks on this forum who fit the bill, and who may be likely to gladly admit to such…fundamentalism is not limited to Protestant Christianity by any stretch.

Exactly. I remember a few years ago there was a thread that went on page after page in which the OP and others said that in order to be Catholic you had to believe the bible is innerent and literal.

If that is not fundamentalist what is?

I honestly think a lot of Catholics are becoming too close bedfellows with fundamental Protestants because we both value life.

 

[cath4alltime]

The popular usage of the term “fundamentalist” is an extreme, which can be applied to any religion and even politics.
The *narrow, original * use of the term fundamentalist, dealt with a literal interpretation of the Bible, using “Scripture alone”.
Question for discussion:
Can a Catholic be a fundamentalist in terms of literal interpretation of the Bible, despite the fact that the Church does not recognize Scripture alone?
And, can a Catholic fit into this category (fundamentalist) if he uses what I will refer to as “Tradition Alone”, (for lack of a better term)?
Do radical traditionalist Catholics fit into that category? Why?

Be nice…

Yes I think anyone can be a fundamentalist about anything. When I was Catholic I would say I did the fundamentalist thing always looking at the SSPX and the Remanent. It’s easy to look round and see what we perceive to be abuses and actual abuses and draw the wagons together

 

[gracepoole]

Sadly, you can be Catholic and Fundamentalist.

This website, for example, is one of those. Claims any non-Catholics (by their definition, any one who participates in a OF Mass or is Protestant) praying violates the First Commandment.

Holy crikey! That site is…disturbed.

 

[JustaServant]

Yes I think anyone can be a fundamentalist about anything. When I was Catholic I would say I did the fundamentalist thing always looking at the SSPX and the Remanent. It’s easy to look round and see what we perceive to be abuses and actual abuses and draw the wagons together

That is the problem with the fundamentalist mindset. Extremism exists in all religions. I started a thread once on the fundamentalist mindset once, got a lot of good feedback.

 

[JRKH]

That is the problem with the fundamentalist mindset. Extremism exists in all religions. I started a thread once on the fundamentalist mindset once, got a lot of good feedback.

Something here that I think well worth discussing is that I do not see “fundamentalism” and “extremism” as necessarily being the same thing.
Maybe I am misunderstanding you here…If I am, please forgive…

I think a person can be a small “f” fundamentalist and not be an extremist.

To me - extremism has the connotation of gross intolerance, and certainly many of those who we classify as fundamentalists might qualify as intolerant…

BUT…

At what point does one pass from being a firmly convicted Christian, holding to the most fundamental of faith principles - to be being an “extremist”…

To me - it seems that the tipping point is when evangelization in charity loses it’s charity…

I don’t know if I expressed this well…but what do others think…
Is there a difference between being a fundamentalist and being an extremist?

Peace
james

 

[Brendan_64]

I’m told that these things are to be understood symbolically, which I understand to mean that they didn’t really happen, even though people ride the fence and say that “symbolic” doesn’t deny the reality of the event. But I believe they happened just as written, and I don’t believe I’m condemned or a heretic or going to Hell because I do believe in them.

As a Catholic you are free to view Genesis an allegorical text (as I do) or as a literal text (as you do).

God Bless

 

[bsroufek]

Something here that I think well worth discussing is that I do not see “fundamentalism” and “extremism” as necessarily being the same thing.
Maybe I am misunderstanding you here…If I am, please forgive…

I think a person can be a small “f” fundamentalist and not be an extremist.

To me - extremism has the connotation of gross intolerance, and certainly many of those who we classify as fundamentalists might qualify as intolerant…

BUT…

At what point does one pass from being a firmly convicted Christian, holding to the most fundamental of faith principles - to be being an “extremist”…

To me - it seems that the tipping point is when evangelization in charity loses it’s charity…

I don’t know if I expressed this well…but what do others think…
Is there a difference between being a fundamentalist and being an extremist?

Peace
james

Jesus is and was extreme. He said that the measure by which we give will be given back to us, and also that we may even lose our lives for our Faith. Finally, we are not to love God only a little, but with ALL our being. That’s extreme. Why do you say that extreme is bad? Sounds like Society’s view to me.

Fundamentalism is a different topic.

 

[JRKH]

Jesus is and was extreme. He said that the measure by which we give will be given back to us, and also that we may even lose our lives for our Faith. Finally, we are not to love God only a little, but with ALL our being. That’s extreme. Why do you say that extreme is bad? Sounds like Society’s view to me.

Fundamentalism is a different topic.

As I stated…Extremist has a certain connotation to me…

When you hear the word “extremist” do you get a different connotation??

Peace
James

 

[EIF5A]

When I read the word “extreme”, I think of someone who, even though they may have good intentions, is not effective in relaying a particular message (e.g., repentance of sins). To me, it means someone who does not have full humility in recognizing their own sins and chooses to focus or magnify others’ sins.

That’s not to say they are wrong. Sin is sin, whether the words come from a saint or a sinner, and if someone is driven to contrition because of them, then glory to God.

But the manner in which a message is given is also important, imho…

Those flagellants we read about in high school history — were they “fundamentalists” in the sense that they took things to the extreme? I saw a documentary about the Medicis and how Savonarola basically judged someone to hell even though they were fearful for their souls. It would have been nice if he offered reconciliation…

 

[JRKH]

When I read the word “extreme”, I think of someone who, even though they may have good intentions, is not effective in relaying a particular message (e.g., repentance of sins). To me, it means someone who does not have full humility in recognizing their own sins and chooses to focus or magnify others’ sins.

That’s not to say they are wrong. Sin is sin, whether the words come from a saint or a sinner, and if someone is driven to contrition because of them, then glory to God.

But the manner in which a message is given is also important, imho…

Those flagellants we read about in high school history — were they “fundamentalists” in the sense that they took things to the extreme? I saw a documentary about the Medicis and how Savonarola basically judged someone to hell even though they were fearful for their souls. It would have been nice if he offered reconciliation…

Let’s keep things straight here…
The post to which I originally responded used the word “extremism” which I think you will agree tends to carry a different connotation than simply saying “extreme”.
Likewise when we here “extremist” this too has a different connotation.
Both words, extremism and extremist, are generally associated with groups not noted for their charity…
If you hear the term “Islamic extremist” what do you think of?

That said - I do agree with what you say above and it fits with what I said in my original post on the subject. That extremism comes about when evangelization looses it’s charity.

Peace
James