> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Charlie Bell > Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 1:43 AM > To: Killer Bs Discussion > Subject: Re: Great Sam Harris Interview > > > > Really? What was the Inquistion all about then?
There was a lot of payback of collaborators with the Moors, ethnic cleansing, etc. involved in the Inquisition. But, I realize your fundamental question is broader than that.... >Enforcing the > Doctrine of the Faith, and burning heretics to the faith. Or the > Mohammedan jihads? Fundamentalism is a new name for something that > has been inherent in religion (and politics and tribalism) for as > long as there have been people - inflexible adherence to whatever > standard has been chosen, and beating up those that disagree... Well, I was using the standard definition of fundamentalism in the Christian religion...which differs from what I see your use as. It is relevant, and not just an argument of semantics, because you were asking questions about the interpretation of scripture. There is no doubt that, from the start, there have been extremely strong arguments over theology. Paul references a number of them in his epistles. The early church, after Paul, had often had bitter differences. In hindsight, I think you can see how people who's family's died preventing authorities from getting copies of scripture would be very angry at those who held that it wasn't a critical part of the faith, and thus did hand over copies. But, this didn't result in many real punishments, except shunning, because there was no earthly authority to back up theological opinion. When Christianity became official, then power was available to back up authority. The first church council at Nicaea produced a creed that defined the orthodox faith. Other views were considered heretical. >From here on out, the Catholic church was a power player. The bishop of Rome, pointed to the heritage of Peter, and called himself the vicar of Peter. After a while, it was changed to the vicar of Christ. The church council pronouncements were considered authoritive, and the result of the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. This was the foundation for a number of the problems the developed. Error had no right, and thus heretics were to be stamped out by all necessary means. This included fairly strong measures. And, of course, there was corruption in the church. Mundane power was backed up by the authority of God. The Inquisition can be seen in the light of a church that had a strong political component as well as being populated/led by rigid thinkers who felt that they had the authority of God and were expected to use their power to fight the evil of those who disagreed with them. But, they were not fundamentalists. The two great doctors of the church (Agustine and Aquinis) did not emphasize a literal interpretation of scripture. The authority of the Church was the keys of the kingdom being passed on from Peter to his successors, not a literal interpretation of scripture. Fundamentalism found it's foundation in the Reformation. Luther, Calvin, et. al. needed to find an authority apart from the Catholic church. It was scripture. Solo scriptura was the cry that undermined the authority of the "keys of the kingdom." Still, I don't think that Luther was really a fundamentalist in the modern sense. Modern day fundamentalism is a reaction to the Enlightenment. The Great Revivals of the 19th century can be seen as a basis for Adventist religions, which started the focus of the theology of endtime and is the basis for the "Left Behind" understanding that many fundamentalists had. It was truly formed, in the US at least, in the early 20th century as a reaction against more liberal theological developments in various Protestant churches. Schisms resulted. One other thing worth noting...fundamentalists tend to be anti-hierarchical. Southern Baptists are the best known fundamentalists in the US. They have no real hierarchy. The Southern Baptist Convention does not have authority over the individual congregations. Indeed, the congregation rules itself by vote; they hire and fire ministers. Fundamentalism also tended to rise up among the poorer classes. Until fairly recently, it was more associated with tent revival meetings that big expensive churches. As the fundamentalists went up in the world, they did gain political and economic power. But, their self image of a besieged underdog is not without roots....its just out of date. So, that's why I said fundamentalism is new. What you have referenced is not new, of course. I think a very strong argument can be made that you are pointing out institutional sins within the Church....and that you are far from the first. Indeed, much of scripture wrestles with this problem. The prophets who proclaimed God's judgment of Israel were not the established priests. Instead, the pointed out the problems with the government and priests. In Macabees, for example, there is a strong example of how those appointed by God to be the priests lost their appointment by their unfaithfulness....with new priests coming along. And, of course, Jesus had a lot to say about the official church of the time. And, throughout the history of Christianity, as there was earlier, there were voices that saw the institutional problems and called for reform. There were voices that were concentrating on their own sins...and dealing with them. Christianity has a wealth of writing within it, which parallels the dialogs seen in the Old Testament. So, I'd argue that a fundamentalist reading of scripture as authority does not have a privileged position compared to other ways of reading scripture (e.g. the technique taught at Catholic, Presbyterian, Episcopal, Methodist, etc. seminaries (and at least by one Russian Orthodox priest who is a professor of scriptures. :-) ). Indeed, since this way represents the education of ministers and priests who work with the overwhelming majority of Christians, it would make sense to consider that more normative than the fundamentalist technique. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
