Date Posted:13:09 Author: Anonymous - 25 Oct 2001 Subject: Re: In Praise of Fundamentalism In reply to:
ketch - 24 Oct 2001
's message, "In Praise of Fundamentalism" on 13:08
An interesting article on fundamentalism (small 'f') that touches on some of the issues being discussed here: especially the way that scripture is quoted and used by fundies to buttress their beliefs. The relevant point is that people will quote scripture and say that Christ meant *only* such and such, to the exclusion of everything else.
Here is an excerpt:
"Biblical Fundamentalism, today, refers to interpreting the Bible with a rigid literalism that wrenches a text from the context of the passage, the whole of Scripture, and the living Tradition of the Church. This method of literalistic interpretation, literalism, should not be confused with the literal meaning of Scripture, which the Church has always affirmed. An example of literalism is the misuse of Ephesians 2:8-9. "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God - not because of works lest any man should boast."
"Fundamentalists often cite this passage as a proof-text that one is saved by faith alone, thus rejecting the necessity of good works. However, the verse never asserts that one is saved by faith alone. That false idea is explicitly rejected in James 2:24: "You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone." What St. Paul teaches is that we are saved by grace through faith, which is exactly what the Catholic Church teaches. Concerning the misuse of Ephesians to reject the necessity of good works, that interpretation falls apart once verse 10 is considered. "For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for [purpose clause] good works" (Eph 2:10).
"This is one of many examples that show how Fundamentalists read their preconceived theology into Sacred Scripture. They then cite the passage out of its context to buttress their position, which is contrary to the literal meaning of the sacred text. Another example of this slanted biblical interpretation is the rejection of the overwhelming evidence that Jesus is referring to his body and blood during the Eucharistic Discourse (Jn 6:25-71). Starting from a theological point of view, which holds that the text can't mean what it says, the passage is twisted to give Jesus' words a figurative meaning. However, the deeper one objectively studies the passage the more persuasive it becomes that Jesus is not speaking metaphorically."