Fundamentalist Mindset

[maltmom]

Here is part of a blog post I wrote a couple years ago on the fundamentalist concept of “separation”.

I once heard a fundamentalist preacher say this about any association with Catholics:
“Ignoring their lost state, being tolerant of their false doctrine, and pretending they are one of us is not going to help them get saved.”
The bolded statement is an eye-opening glimpse into the dark pit of the fundamentalist soul. If one believes that he or she has experienced what no other has (being “born again”), and possesses what others other than them could not possibly have (the Holy Spirit), it creates an elitist world-view that allows only those to whom we agree with, to enter.
Over the years I have heard “that person is now a (insert opposition group here), so I had to ’break fellowship’ with them” This is the fundamentalist doctrine of “separation”. A superior, elitist attitude of belonging to a privileged group. Those who do not belong to the group are called “unrepentant brothers and false teachers”
The problem is, that encompasses quite a population if one takes that to its logical conclusion. This encompasses people far beyond hated Catholics and liberals. It also includes people within their own ‘circle’ with whom they disagree. To belong to this ever shrinking circle becomes the object they strive for.
In rationalizing that Christians who don’t agree with you are all “compromisers,” they assume that is the indicator of true spirituality.
They truly believe they are superior. This theological “rigidity” is more important than all other factors. And sadly, there is a trail of broken relationships in their past that is blamed on the actions of the people they “separated” from. Tragically, these broken relationships include family members and former friends.
This completely went against how I was raised by my parents. We did not abandon family and friends based on disagreements or world-view. Jesus taught us to love one another, not to pick and choose whom we love.
I believe one of the reasons fundamental Baptists think this way has to do with living in a fantasy world of their own making. They look to a reality that never existed, and hope for a Utopia that never will exist. When struck by the fact that it does not, it destroys their illusions and they lapse into cynicism and depression. They deal with this by altering reality through ‘separation’ from whatever or whoever is not like themselves and an end-times fairy tale which allows them to press on in world that does not accept them.
“Fellowshipping” with a group who truly believe they are better than others can be a surreal experience. It leads logically to exclusion based on reasons that hardly fit into their “Biblical world-view”. Many times it is based on race, class, education, and sex.
The sad part is, the longer one “fellowships” with fundamentalists, “separation” from them becomes a relief.

What an awesome blog post. When I converted a couple of months ago I wondered how many would give me a rough time about it. I’m happy to say that there was one and she didn’t remember it later (health issues). All I heard was that they knew I was a Christian and that if this is where God wants me so be it. I was also told that if I had told them I was becoming Morman, JW or an atheist they would have sat me down for an intervention.

 

[minkymurph]

What an awesome blog post. When I converted a couple of months ago I wondered how many would give me a rough time about it. I’m happy to say that there was one and she didn’t remember it later (health issues). All I heard was that they knew I was a Christian and that if this is where God wants me so be it.

Funny, my fundamentalist friend said something similar to me when I converted.

 

[jericho777]

Ah yes, the old tried and found not to be true fundamentalist quoting of Corinthians to justify thier “separation” from those they do not agree with.
First, these verses are not talking about separation from other Christians, yet it is often used by fundamentalists as if it was.
Second, there’s a huge difference between living a life that honors God that makes one clearly different from the lives of those around us who don’t, and withdrawing ourselves completely from all interaction with people in the world and rejecting them and anything they do, say or create as evil.

Well it’s so good you embrace all that call themselves Christians and their beliefs without reservation.

I was never suggesting withdrawing one’s self from living in the world. You neglected to read the last sentence about living in the world and not being part of it. How else can the world be changed if you are not engaging them with the gospel of Christ? Aren’t those who are living separated lives in monastic communities doing what you are accusing fundamentalists of?

 

[Contarini]

I find it odd that ambiguity and nuance are desirable in academic culture today. Shouldn’t a theory be evaluated based on its explanation of truth.

Certainly. And the more you devote yourself to truth–truth with a little “t,” the kind of truth scholars study–the more ambiguity and nuance you find in it. To fail to recognize ambiguity and nuance is to speak a lie. People whose devotion to Truth leads them to ignore truth are not true friends of either the lowercase or the capital letter.

Ambiguity and nuance, of course, are not the same thing–nuance often clarifies ambiguity. By pursuing nuance, we increase clarity. But at the same time, much will remain ambiguous to our limited, mortal eyes. That’s just a recognition of our human condition and it’s an important theological truth as well as a necessary condition to any serious scholarship.

Why do I continue to see the phrase “it lacks nuance” as if that is the end of the argument?

It’s not the end of the argument–it should be the beginning of the argument.

Now, sectarian and schismatic might be the truth.

No, it might not.

How’s that for a statement that lacks nuance?

The Christian faith is about drawing all creation into unity with God through the Incarnate Logos and His Body the Church. It may indeed be necessary for us sometimes to take a stance of “against the world for the world,” and the tension between the two halves of that paradox is one of the basic issues in post-Vatican-II Catholicism, as I’ve been trying to explain to my Protestant online seminary students (I’ve just been writing the final module in my summer church history course). But when you abandon the “for the world” half, as dispensationalist fundamentalism in particular does, quite explicitly and theologically, you have created a monstrous perversion of orthodox Christianity.

Edwin

 

[JustaServant]

Well it’s so good you embrace all that call themselves Christians and their beliefs without reservation.

I was never suggesting withdrawing one’s self from living in the world. You neglected to read the last sentence about living in the world and not being part of it. How else can the world be changed if you are not engaging them with the gospel of Christ? Aren’t those who are living separated lives in monastic communities doing what you are accusing fundamentalists of?

Comparing what fundamentalism calls “separation” with monastic communities goes beyond even apples and oranges.
I humbly submit to the wisdom CAFs resident Franciscan JReducation:

Monastic communities such as the Franciscans, Dominicans, Augustinians, Carmelites, and Trinitarians take from the monastic communities the life of prayer, the intense community life, manual labor, penance, strict order in all things, obedience to the rule and the superior, poverty.
But they do not live inside a monastery.
Francis of Assisi founded the mendicant movement. His intention was to take the religious life outside of the monastery. His friars were never to be monks or live like the monks. They were to pray, obey, work, and do penance like the monks. But they were to have two things that the monks did not have. First, they were not to own any property. They had total poverty, which monks do not have. Second, they were never to detach from the world, which the monks did. The friars were to make use of whatever the world had to offer as long as it was useful and to reject what was not useful.

During the time of Francis and Dominic, who are considered the patriarchs of the mendicant movement, also called friars, there was no TV and very few sports. But the friars did engage in whatever forms of entertainment were available. They read books. Francis was a musician, a poet and son writer. They put on plays. In fact, that’s how we get the Christmas cretch and the Stations of the Cross. St. Francis loved the theater. It made him very sad that the common people did not know how to read and were unable to get the full benefit of the Christmas story or Christ’s passion, so he created the first Christmas pageant and the first living Stations of the Cross. He pulled from his skills and love for the theater and put them to good use in preaching. Dominicans always read. From the very beginning they were the most well educated preachers in the world, later followed by the Jesuits. They not only read religious books. The two orders have read poetry, novels, science, theater and they made important contributions to the world of writing and science. For example, St. Maximilian Kolbe was an engineer and a mathematician. He was also the first religious journalist. He was a Franciscan. Pope John Paul II was a play writer and an actor, even after he was a priest.

Friars are to live the life of the monks, but remain connected to the world. What we take from the monastery is the prayer, silence, penance, obedience and detachment from what is unnecessary. We do not give up what is good for man and what brings him enjoyment of life. Francis of Assisi was very emphatic that the world was good, because it came from the hand of God. What has to be rejected is whatever is evil. Man takes the good things that God gives us and ruins them. A good movie, a good game of basketball, a good book is not evil. The challenge that the friar faces is separating the good from the garbage. This requires a great deal of discipline. It is much easier to throw out all movies, books, sports and other forms of entertainment. You don’t to think and you don’t have to make judgments. But that’s not the vision that the great mendicant patriarchs had, Dominic and Francis. They wanted their sons to struggle with these choices, because when they struggled and they made the right choices between the good and the bad, they set an example for the laity.

There simply is no comparison.

 

[JustaServant]

Simply put, monastic orders separate out of humility.
Fundamentalists separate out of superiority.

 

[jericho777]

So, are you saying there are no psychological/emotional reasons that explains why someone should be attracted to Christian fundamentalism, and the reason they are fundamentalists is a consequence of the belief separating oneself from those who are not fundamentalists is necessary for salvation?

Note - I am posing this as a question for the purpose of seeking clarity on your line of reasoning in order not to misinterpret your words, and to keep on the topic of the thread. As I understand it, the purpose of the thread is not should one be a fundamentalist or are fundamentalists ‘right,’ but is there some psychological/emotional reason why people are attracted to it.

Thank you minkymurph for seeking clarification. It is being portrayed by some that being fundamentalist Christian is a sign of mental defect or looking for some easy way out of life. I could not disagree more. I am not of this denomination but find no fault with the definition I posted. I think the mindset/reasons are the same that anyone is “fundamentalist“ whatever. Be it Catholic, Protestant, Jewish and Muslim or fill in the blank. I think they are people trying to do the right thing as they perceive “right” to be. Although their doctrine and its implementation may be called into question from one’s own particular viewpoint.

I think the reasons for total separation for any group would be the same namely the preservation of identity, maintaining of orthodoxy or preservation of culture. This occurs in all societies and across all socio economic groups around the world, religious or not. People feel safe with their own kind because they receive support and acceptance within their group. The sense of belonging and group acceptance is a powerful societal force.

 

[Contarini]

Thank you minkymurph for seeking clarification. It is being portrayed by some that being fundamentalist Christian is a sign of mental defect

I’m uncomfortable with this psychological approach myself.

Fundamentalist Protestantism in the strict, sectarian sense is damnable heresy.

“Fundamentalism” in the broader, methodological sense is a deeply flawed way of approaching the Christian faith.

But I’m uncomfortable “diagnosing” people who are fundamentalists in either sense–I’d rather take them seriously enough to try to show them that they are wrong. . . .

Edwin

 

[jericho777]

Simply put, monastic orders separate out of humility.
Fundamentalists separate out of superiority.

Some would say humility is a false premiss or selfish excuse. I don’t think fundies think they are superior by any stretch. You can call it whatever you like and the reasons don’t matter because in the end either group is not engaging the culture for Christ.

 

[minkymurph]

Thank you minkymurph for seeking clarification. It is being portrayed by some that being fundamentalist Christian is a sign of mental defect or looking for some easy way out of life. I could not disagree more. I am not of this denomination but find no fault with the definition I posted. I think the mindset/reasons are the same that anyone is “fundamentalist“ whatever. Be it Catholic, Protestant, Jewish and Muslim or fill in the blank. I think they are people trying to do the right thing as they perceive “right” to be. Although their doctrine and its implementation may be called into question from one’s own particular viewpoint.

I think the reasons for total separation for any group would be the same namely the preservation of identity, maintaining of orthodoxy or preservation of culture. This occurs in all societies and across all socio economic groups around the world, religious or not. People feel safe with their own kind because they receive support and acceptance within their group. The sense of belonging and group acceptance is a powerful societal force.

Certainly fundamentalism takes many forms. You can be a ‘fundamentalist’ anything. To say that all fundamentalists have a mental defect or are looking for an easy life would a huge generalization.

There is no doubt people feel safe with their own ‘kind’ and a sense of belonging and group acceptance is a powerful societal force, but I would argue that is not necessarily a good thing. It may be sometimes, but not all the time. Yes, it’s good to hang out with like minded people, but not all the time. I also remember someone saying to me when you’re inside the circle you can’t see whats going on, you have to step outside the circle and look in to see what is going on.

I think people should step outside their comfort zone. If you never step outside your comfort zone, (Not ‘you’ personally) you will find it much more difficult to put yourself in someone else’s shoes, or see things from anyone else’s perspective. Meaning, you’re understanding of the world around will be very limited. It also facilitates the formation of opinions based on little more than assumptions, leading to stereotyping which creates prejudice. People inside the ‘circle,’ whatever that ‘circle’ may be are often unaware of these effects because they are inside the ‘circle.’ Those on the ‘outside’ can see it quite clearly. People inside the ‘circle’ are often less open to new ideas, resistant to change and stay people stuck within a certain mindset.

There are people who can maintain their identity and culture and integrate. I’m not boasting but the Irish are particularly good at that. (Well, they are when they go abroad, they’re not so good at it at home.) The Chinese are another example. The Chinese have been in Ireland for years and have maintained their identity while and the same time integrating exceedingly well. There are other ethnic minorities that just refuse to integrate and consequently, they tend to be unpopular which also leads to stereotyping and prejudice.

 

[minkymurph]

I’m uncomfortable with this psychological approach myself.

Fundamentalist Protestantism in the strict, sectarian sense is damnable heresy.

“Fundamentalism” in the broader, methodological sense is a deeply flawed way of approaching the Christian faith.

But I’m uncomfortable “diagnosing” people who are fundamentalists in either sense–I’d rather take them seriously enough to try to show them that they are wrong. . . .

Edwin

It’s not really a case of ‘diagnosing’ people. I would argue understanding the psychology is an essential element of handing on faith and developing faith in others. If you little in the way of understanding why someone thinks the way they do, you are less likely to be successful in reaching them. People don’t respond very well to being told they’re wrong, even when presented with sound reasoning, or perhaps even irrevocable proof. Being brought up a JW, I would say you would extremely difficult to reach a JW no matter how much you showed them they are wrong. The only JW you are likely to reach is one who is already questioning their faith. Presenting them with challenges to their faith often results in them being more convinced they have the true religion.

Just out of interest, what’s Episcopalian?

 

[MJE]

Simply put, monastic orders separate out of humility.
Fundamentalists separate out of superiority.

Or how about *fear *in place of superiority?

 

[CyberAngel]

That’s what I figured you were saying. Just wanted you to “dumb it down” for us nitwits out here.
Curious you bring up Confession. I have thought about that in relation to this subject. The fundamentalist mindset is obsessed with the idea of trying to look sinless and pure. But since they have no concept of the Catholic Sacrament of Confession, many are driven to despair over sin. Despite thier contention that they can “simply confess to God alone”, there is no assurance of sins forgiven, so the only path they have (and this is from personal experience and observation) is to fall into denial (ignore it) and continue “faking”.

Not true. God forgives sins.
It seems I’m not a fundamentalist after all

 

[CyberAngel]

Coming back to the purpose of the thread - the psychology of why people become fundamentalists -

I would argue lots of people don’t become fundamentalists, but are conditioned to be fundamentalists from an early age. There are people who were brought up fundamentalists. As such, it not a case that they BECAME fundamentalists so much as they always were because they were not offered any other choice.
X
Of course there are people who do become fundamentalists, and I have a more cynical theory on that. Firstly, it appeals to them because they gain the approval of others. People with a low self-esteem will desire the approval of others, and fundamentalism gives them the opportunity to attain that as the approval of others features highly - ‘I believe everything, I’m trying to be good and do everything right’ will gain them the approval they desire.

Secondly, you have a point about pride. Fundamentalism appeals to pride in that it tends to be very patriarchal. As such, it offers men who desire status, importance and have others to look up to them an opportunity to satisfy that pride that would not be afforded them in many mainstream Christian denominations.
X
OK - that’s the theory. Now you can pick it apart.

Hmmm…I was turned to Christ when adult and my father was an Atheist

Low self-esteem…no, not that so much

Pride…nope, BUT that might follow because of fundamentalism…

just thinking aloud here…

 

[CyberAngel]

After reading some very delightful posts
I’m now wondering if this is fundamentalism:
I can’t join any Assembly which
a) promote gay marriages in any way
b) has woman teachers/leaders
c) has some other teaching/doctrine that I can’t stand
AND
taking Bible mostly literally (You know what I mean)
Creation, Young Earth, miracles, Virgin birth, resurrection
Anything against Liberal Christianity
Can’t even stand the new translations which seem to change the text

Is this being a Fundamentalist?

 

[minkymurph]

Hmmm…I was turned to Christ when adult and my father was an Atheist

Low self-esteem…no, not that so much

Pride…nope, BUT that might follow because of fundamentalism…

just thinking aloud here…

Well of course the reasoning I use does not apply to every individual - hence the term ‘some’ people - and I am not suggesting everyone who is a fundamentalist has a low self-esteem or turns to it out pride. There are many reasons why fundamentalism has an appeal. Those I have outlined are just some of them. We can’t of course generalize. Individuals have their own unique and specific reasons why they embrace fundamentalism. As such, while we can put forward explanations in a general sense, generalizations can’t be applied to every individual and we cannot conclude an individual is a fundamentalist because of pride, low self-esteem or any other reason that has been proposed.

My point is that fundamentalism has an appeal to pride and those with low self-esteem not so much because of what they believe, but because of how it can operate in practice which I addressed in the previous post. On the matter of pride, I agree pride may follow because of fundamentalism. However, it may also be the case fundamentalism has an appeal to those who already desire self-importance and personal prestige, and find it difficult to satisfy their aspirations elsewhere. It appeals to those with low-self esteem and they find a ready made circle of ‘friends’ which they perhaps lack and desire, and offers that much wanted approval of others that is hard to find elsewhere.

 

[minkymurph]

After reading some very delightful posts
I’m now wondering if this is fundamentalism:
I can’t join any Assembly which
a) promote gay marriages in any way
b) has woman teachers/leaders
c) has some other teaching/doctrine that I can’t stand
AND
taking Bible mostly literally (You know what I mean)
Creation, Young Earth, miracles, Virgin birth, resurrection
Anything against Liberal Christianity
Can’t even stand the new translations which seem to change the text

Is this being a Fundamentalist?

That’s pretty much what I would understand it to be. You could also add not having any close friends that disagree with any of the above.

 

[JustaServant]

Some would say humility is a false premiss or selfish excuse. I don’t think fundies think they are superior by any stretch. You can call it whatever you like and the reasons don’t matter because in the end either group is not engaging the culture for Christ.

Lets see, I spent 20 years among fundamentalists.
You spent how long with monastics? You obviously didn’t read what JReducation wrote. No great surprise there.
Fundies DO think they are superior, I’m not pulling that out of my beehind. I experienced it, I was there, I even pastored at one point.
I know what I am talking about.

 

[JustaServant]

Or how about *fear *in place of superiority?

Fear and superiority can go hand in hand. Hate groups like the KKK certainly do both.

 

[JustaServant]

Not true. God forgives sins.
It seems I’m not a fundamentalist after all

I never said God does not forgive sins.
I said fundamentalists do not have that assurance despite thier claims.