.jpg)
In 1921, and less than a year before his renowned May 1922
sermon, Fosdick was the guest preacher at missionary conferences in China and in
Karuizawa, Japan. It was an eye-opening experience for him.
In The Living of These Days,
Fosdick’s autobiography published when he was 78, he wrote:
It was one of the most informing and revealing experiences I ever had. For one thing, I saw fundamentalism for the first time in its full intensity. The missionary community was split wide open. On one side, some of the largest personalities and most intelligent views one could meet anywhere; on the other, such narrowness and obscurantism as seemed downright incredible.
In “Shall the Fundamentalists Win? Fosdick discussed
briefly four of what the fundamentalists considered essential (=fundamental) to
the Christian religion: the virgin birth of Jesus, the inerrancy of the Bible, the
substitutionary atonement of Jesus, and Jesus’ literal second coming.
However, while he did not agree with the fundamentalists on
those points of doctrine, Fosdick’s main criticism was not their doctrinal
beliefs as such but their intolerance for those Christians, such as him, who espoused
alternative interpretations of Christianity.
He emphasized, “We must be able to think our modern life clear
through in Christian terms, and to do that we also must be able to think our
Christian faith clear through in modern terms.”
Fosdick continued, “Now the people in this generation who are
trying to do this are the liberals, and the Fundamentalists are out on a
campaign to shut against them the doors of the Christian fellowship.”
So, this was the pivotal question, “Shall they be allowed to
succeed?”
Fosdick’s answer to his question was of course in the
negative, and he confidently concluded: “I do not believe for one moment that
the Fundamentalists are going to succeed.”
But have the fundamentalists won? This month, various
Christian writers have reflected on Fosdick’s 100-year-old sermon, and some have
concluded that, indeed, the fundamentalists have won.
For example, James Lupfer, a Florida-based journalist, wrote,
“100 years later, Fosdick’s question, ‘Shall the fundamentalists win?’ still echoes.”
He concludes in that May
20 article published by Religion News Service, “The answer, improbable at
the time, was, ‘Yes, they shall.’”
More importantly, Diana Butler Bass (b. 1959, ten years
before Fosdick’s death), a trustworthy American historian of Christianity, posted
four essays between April 29 and May 20 regarding Fosdick’s 5/1922 sermon.
The subtitle of the
first one is, “A Century After the Question: They Have.”
Near the end of Bass’s
fourth essay, she quotes Fosdick’s confident assertion about the
fundamentalists failing and then concludes, “I confess that I do not share his certainty.
I do not know if they will ultimately win, but they are—right now—stronger than
ever.”
But I disagree with Lupfer and Bass and others who agree
with them regarding the fundamentalists having won.
True, fundamentalists, now generally known by the label “conservative
evangelicals,” have gained and wielded considerable political power and have been
victorious in various culture war battles since 1980, but that is not what
Fosdick was dealing with in his sermon.
(And it can be credibly argued that the Republican Party has
“won” by using conservative evangelicals far more than the latter have “won” by
their influence upon the GOP.)
Certainly, conservative evangelicals have “won” in some Christian
denominations—such as the Southern Baptist Convention, which did succeed in dispelling
moderates/progressives (such as I).
Most of the respected and influential Christian spokespersons
cited in public media, though, are not conservative evangelicals (=fundamentalists).
The latter are most often described somewhat disdainfully.
To paraphrase Fosdick, “I do not believe for one moment that
the fundamentalists have succeeded.”
_____
* Fosdick’s sermon in its entirety can be found at this website.
** For further consideration of this topic, I recommend
the detailed essay “Did
the Fundamentalists Win?” posted on May 17 by my friend Brian Kaylor and
his colleague Beau Underwood. And for more about Fosdick and Riverside Church
(where he was pastor from 1925~45), see my 10/5/15
blog post.
.jpg)
Good blog, Leroy! It seems that the fundamentalists have more power than ever--in this country and abroad. The problem, it seems to me, is that in this country they've also married right-wing politics, which, I suspect, will discredit them fairly fully as time goes on.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Anton. Part of what I would say in response to what you wrote is similar to what I wrote to Bruce below, and part of my response there is similar to the end of your comments. What I haven't addressed to this point is the power of fundamentalism abroad.
DeleteThe tensions Fosdick saw among the missionaries in China in 1921 still exists today. There continues to be ongoing tension between the "underground" house churches, which generally are quite conservative/traditional, and the churches which have registered with the central government, mainly the Protestant Three-Self Church and China Christian Council.
In many African and South American countries, there are numerous conservative evangelical megachurches. And then perhaps still the largest church in the world, is the Yoido Full Gospel Church in Seoul, Korea, a church that is Pentecostal and rather conservative. So, yes, whether they have "won" or not, the Christian "fundamentalism" seen abroad is substantial and should not be dismissed or downplayed.
I don't know a lot about the fundamentalists abroad, but I keep reading about them from time to time in places like The Economist and the NYTimes.
DeleteI read what you wrote below about us "mature men." I think we're just highly seasoned! LOL
The first comments received this morning was just before 6 a.m. (We mature men tend to be early risers!). Local Thinking Friend Bruce Morgan wrote,
ReplyDelete"Thanks, Leroy. Regardless of whether the Fundamentalists have won or lost, there is just enough Fundamentalist alignment with the hard right segment of the Republican party and with Christian Nationalism, to do great harm to the essential teachings of Christianity and to Christianity's image in the public square."
Thanks, Bruce, for your pertinent comments. I stand by my conclusion, but I also fully agree with what you wrote. In any "war," the losing side can do much harm before all the battles are over. So, while I believe that fundamentalism has not won to this point and will not win in the end, I do acknowledge that as you wrote, it has done "great harm to the essential teachings of Christianity and to Christianity's image in the public square."
DeleteAnd then a few minutes ago, Thinking Friend Glenn Hinson in Kentucky wrote,
ReplyDelete"My pastor preached on this topic yesterday. I would make one point that I think bears on the answer to that question. Fundamentalism has metamorphosed from a primarily theological movement into a primarily political movement. Both have even intolerant, but political fundamentalism has become more savage and dangerous. It threatens our democracy, and it is perhaps too early to answer the question as to whether they will win. The answer is dependent upon whether there are persons deeply enough infected with the teaching of Jesus Christ to act with integrity and grit."
Thanks, Dr. Hinson, and I basically agree with what you wrote about fundamentalism today being more of a political movement than a theological movement. And, yes, I think it remains to be seen how the fight for democracy turns out. But as I said in the blog article, I still think the Republican Party has gained power by using conservative evangelicals far more than the latter have influenced the GOP.
DeleteI have a question rather than a comment:
ReplyDeleteWhat is your and Others comments on what you wrote in this Blog about the Four(4)essential beliefs of the Fundamentalist to the Christian Religion?
Do your accept these doctrines and why OR why Not?
Respectfully submitted,
John Tim Carr
John Tim, I'm sorry to be so slow in responding to your questions. They are good questions but not ones that can be answered in just a few words.
DeleteHere is the link to what I wrote about Jesus' penal substitutionary atonement in July 2017: https://theviewfromthisseat.blogspot.com/2017/07/what-about-penal-substitutionary.html
I wrote about the issue of Bible inerrancy in the fifth chapter of my book "Fed Up with Fundamentalism," which I think you have. And I have a brief discussion of the virgin birth of Jesus in the seventh chapter of "The Limits of Liberalism."
I haven't written much about the Second Coming, but my March 25, 2015, blog article is related to that issue. Here is the link: https://theviewfromthisseat.blogspot.com/2015/03/do-you-believe-in-rapture.html
Here are meaningful comments from Thinking Friend Eric Dollard in Chicago:
ReplyDelete"Thanks, Leroy, for bringing up this interesting question. The fundamentalists (or "conservative evangelicals") have won some recent battles, but I think the future is not bright for them. I have read that young people are either leaving these conservative congregations, or not joining them at all in the first place. A majority of young people (i.e., under 30), perhaps a large majority, reject homophobia, religious intolerance, racism, and gender roles for women. Hopefully, they will continue to reject these things as they grow older.
"Any thoughts on the report just released about sexual abuse and coverups by clergy in the SBC?"
Thanks for your comments, Eric--and I fully agree with your main paragraph. I am quite sure what you listed as things that perhaps a large majority of young people reject are also things that Fosdick would reject if he were alive today. And it is because fundamentalists / conservative evangelicals are deeply entwined in those problems, "the future is not bright for them," as you say.
DeleteI certainly have a lot of thoughts about the sexual abuse and coverups by clergy in the SBC, but I have decided that so much is being written about that now than I would not try to make any public statement--other than to say that it is a painful thing to see a denomination I once loved so much fallen so low.
Seems our "theological" and religious controversies have always been entwined with disagreements grounded in political, cultural and world-view beliefs. To follow Christ purely is a narrow, hazardous road, who can do it? Baptists exist at all because it was necessary to part from, to resist, the abuses of church-state entanglements. Our own First Amendment reflects Baptist influence on the Constitutional debates of the 1770s and 1780s. How grievous that so many "Baptists" are lusting after religious power riding on so-called "conservative" political coattails! Being manipulated by shameless cynics who intend an imbalanced, possibly one-party government.
ReplyDeleteToo strong? Study the revanchist German Radical Right politics of the 1920s and 1930s in "das Luegenkaisertum" (Empire of Lies), on racial hatred, fear of the "other", the lust for a salvific "Leader", the quest for security against threats real and overemphasized or imagined, the unmistakable conflation of German State Power and culture and Christianity, and, above all, Fear, if "such and such" was not corrected. Were Germans already bent thus-wards? Many were, surely.
But must we be thus bent? Does the USA not deserve a balanced government as dared in the Constitution? Should we not have leaders who can distinguish between Christian citizenship and a dangerous co-option of "sincere" faith by political and "religious" demagogues? Has it come to the point that, in order to demonstrate fidelity to God, the authoritarian potential in Fundamentalism is willing to be wed to Radical Right politics and government? Is that the Jesus Way? I tremble (with anger, admittedly), but with great concern for the self-destructive "perishing" of a polarized body politic, the Congress, and of American resolve that included a more consistently moral folk, churchly or not.
I faith as in politics, I pray for a Middle Way that appeals to Reality and not to Fundamentalist Idealism.
I left out modern concerns of media manipulation and abuse, and of the pummeling of the German public by Radical Right spokesmen. That poison really works.
DeleteJerry, thanks for your erudite comments, including your linking Baptists to the important emphasis on separation of church and state. -- As you know, but some may not, even though his 1922 sermon was delivered in the Presbyterian church in Manhattan where he was then pastor, Fosdick was ordained as a Baptist minister in 1903, and he was pastor of a Baptist church in New Jersey from 1904 to 1915.
DeleteLate last night, local Thinking Friend Bob Southard wrote,
ReplyDelete"My answer is we will know if the 'Christian?' conservatives/far right autocratic ideologists win with this November's election. If they get the majority in the US House and Senate, then I say they won. If neither, then I say Christian Progressives and passionate believers in democracy won. If they lose one but not the other, then maybe it will be decided by the next election. And the issue that may save the ship of democracy is gun safety. A big majority of voters can see they have to vote for people who have reasonable views and power/guts enough to say and vote so. I think one line that can shift things is, "I lay the 21 Texas school deaths at the feet of the Republicans who drug their feet at every opportunity to make the changes that would make a difference.
Bob, I agree that this year's November elections are of great importance, and I am not optimistic about the outcome of those elections. But the question under consideration was posed in 1922, and I don't think the final answer is dependent upon the 2022 elections. Things will be clearer by the outcome of the 2044 elections (which I certainly won't be around to see the results of). Let's do what we can to influence the outcome of the 2022 (and the 2024) elections, but let's realize that the definitive answer about the fundamentalists winning or losing will not be decided in those elections.
DeleteThank you, Leroy. I remember when I discovered Fosdick. I think I found it comforting around 1980 that the struggle with fundamentalism had been going on for quite a while already. A few years ago, I was talking with a trusted fellow believer, and I lamented that at this rate, the church as we know it will cease to exist in what? 30? 50? years. In the face of my doomsday predictions, she calmly said, The church will not fade away. It will become what it needs to be. I pray so.
ReplyDeleteFundamentalists are not winning, although they are strong enough to be very dangerous. Back in the SBC takeover, they talked about "a hill to die on." Sure enough, once they completed their takeover the SBC started to shrink. I think that deep inside fundamentalists know that their position does not make sense, and they fall prey to outrageous lies as they try to find some sort of foundation for their beliefs. Of course, the position of traditional religious fundamentalists is no worse than that of their friends, the religion of capitalism fundamentalists. Science is destroying both of them, we just have to hope that their destruction does not take everyone else down with them. Watching the progress of global warming and income inequality, it seems quite possible that the "winners" of this battle will be the cockroaches!
ReplyDeleteDr. Richard F. (Rick) Wilson was a "teaching theologian" at Mercer University in Georgia from 1988 until his retirement this year. Yesterday I received a Facebook message from him, which I am posting here with his permission.
ReplyDelete"I read your posts and always enjoy and am challenged by your thinking.
"I agree with MLK, Jr.'s assessment of Fosdick.
"I am less inclined to join the choir that sings the song of fundamentalism's victory. My assessment is that the apparent victory of fundamentalism is, instead, a case of the hyper-politicization of Christianity akin to what happened in Germany in the '30s and early '40s. The so-called Confessing Church tried--and failed--to stem the tide of nationalism. My hope is that contemporary fundamentalism will be exposed as a political movement rather than a religious movement.
"Rev. Dr. Rafael Warnock may well carry the load.
"It is my prayer."
Thanks for your comments, Rick, and I was pleased to see that our views about fundamentalism are much the same. Indeed, there seems to be considerable similarity between the "German Christians" of the 1930s and the "conservative evangelicals" in the U.S. now.
DeleteThe upcoming senatorial election in Georgia is certainly of the greatest importance to the future of our country. Most of the White conservative evangelicals in Georgia will likely vote for Hershel Walker, who is touted as an "outspoken Christian." However, I'm sure you and many other thoughtful Christians in Georgia, though, will be working hard for the re-election of Sen. Warnock--and the election of Stacey Abrams.