Is There Room for Fundamentalists?

In the midst of the search for unity among Christians, and for a meaningful concept of the Church, it might not be out of place to raise the question: “Is there room for a fundamentalist in the Church today?”

The question does not admit a ready answer for want of accurate terminology. Anyone may be categorized by others as a fundamentalist for any of several considerations. If, for example, one gives evidence that he regards the “Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as the only rule to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy him,” there are those who readily put the mark of fundamentalism upon him. If one regards divine redemption of man as a basic key for scriptural interpretation, there are others who will nod knowing heads. If a person would suggest that it is in order for us to take heed to our doctrine, he qualifies himself in the minds of many for the label “fundamentalist.” If one would speak of the virgin birth of Jesus Christ, or insist upon His essential deity, “well … what need have we of further proof?”

THE OBVIOUS INTENT

Whatever may be the occasion for its use, the connotation of the term “fundamentalist” is fairly plain. The meaning may be loose, but the intent is obvious; it is a word used to designate something or someone offensive. For example, a fundamentalist is ignorant, hopelessly enamored of the past, and consequently opposed to everything that has appeared on the human scene since the steam engine. Or “fundamentalist” may be a term of pity to denote a poor fellow who has presumably never had the opportunity to know better. Yet again, the term may suggest one who lives in a world with systems of his own making, all or most of which have no relevance to the mess we are in today. The fundamentalist is a mean spirit, a pharisaical character. He is a cantankerous person who is ready to fight at the drop of a theological diphthong; therefore, he is suspect in that it may be assumed that “fundamentalists split churches.” A fundamentalist is one who is devoid of human warmth, and is callous to the need that lies about on every hand. He is habitually uncooperative so that we may describe some events by saying: “… and even the fundamentalists came in on it.”

If there is some difficulty in positive identification as to who is and who is not a fundamentalist, there is certainly little question as to the intended implication of the word. Indeed, it oftentimes seems to be accepted that a fundamentalist is of such dangerous persuasion and questionable character as to be sub-Christian, if not anti-Christian.

A LABEL AND A LIBEL

It goes without saying that anyone may be called a fundamentalist by any other person. However, professional gossip being what it is, once the label is affixed it remains, with probably no one ever having taken the time to inquire into the reason for the use of the term. Inasmuch as major Protestant denominations are dominated by what is called a liberal tradition, to be called a fundamentalist may well nigh be the end of a professional career. There is segregation by label as well as by skin. The only difference is that the latter is recognized and generally condemned, while the former is cherished and even encouraged as being essential for the good of the whole Church. In a day when prejudice is hardly regarded as sufficient ground for the forming of attitudes toward others, the tag with one word “fundamentalist” is sufficient to excite the bias of many young men for whom some excuse might be found, and to stir the undisciplined wrath of older men who ought to know and to be better. It makes little difference how, why, or by whom one may have acquired the designation; the possession of the label is enough to make him the object of suspicion, indifference, if not outright antipathy.

WHOLENESS OF DEDICATION

In most cases it would be impossible to find any connection with the fundamentalism of the early decades of this century. Simple inquiry would disclose that those who are called fundamentalists have come out of many backgrounds. Here are men and women who have sought a satisfying answer to the distress that is our day; they have found what they sought in Jesus Christ. The life and knowledge that they have received in him, have left them with no alternative but to commit themselves to him, his Cause, his Church, and his Kingdom. They have taken seriously the Word of God, believed its promises—and found God to be faithful; the authority of scriptural revelation is basic in their lives. They will not take lightly the One in whom, by whom and through whom are all things in their lives. They approach their tasks in a deep sense of obligation and ask only to be used of the Lord who loved them and gave himself for them. They feel themselves under an impelling divine constraint to serve him—somewhere, somehow.

Whether any individual’s position is characterized by one or more of these emphases, one may scarcely doubt that his personal dedication to the Lord Jesus Christ is a matter of deep conviction. Many such are giving evidence of the wholeness of their dedication by selfless service. To probe their inner compulsion to serve and bear witness is to discover that they have got hold of a truth, a power, a presence within New Testament revelation. They are committed to Jesus Christ without reservation; such commitment means more to them than human sanction, ecclesiastical preferment, or a popularity among the pious.

FRUITFUL LIVES

The obvious fact is that there are many such persons; they are to be found in every major denomination seeking to make their lives fruitful and their service profitable to the Lord. They are teaching; they are writing. They are witnessing; they are doing basic research. They are sustaining pastoral labors; they are praying. By any human standards that we might believe we could apply to such works, they are being blessed by God. To call them “fundamentalists” with the suggestion or open charge that they make up an enemy within, which is conspiring to take over the organization and financial assets of the churches, is to charge them with motives not suitable for the situation. To look upon them as a resurgent fundamentalism, meaning by this a lurking beast once driven to cover but which now prowls about seeking whom he may destroy—this simply is not true. What they believe, they hold as the end of a long course of intellectual persuasion. Their commitment does not rest in some theological standard, but is rather grounded in the conviction that they have been crucified with Christ and it is no longer they who live but Christ who lives in them.

Just plain honesty ought to dictate a recognition of the fact that there are those who are called “fundamentalists” who are a part of our present scene. They are not seeking to start new controversies; they are seeking to stand in the biblical and theological traditions of the churches to which they belong. “The Lordship of Christ” is a meaningful phrase and they have something to contribute for the understanding of the Church at this point. “Servant Lord and servant people” is a phrase which they can utter with lively appreciation of what God has done for them in Christ and of what their commitment now costs them.

CAST THEM OUT?

Does the concept of the Church and the nature of the unity being sought have room in doctrine and in spirit for those who are called fundamentalists?

The answers thus far are not very encouraging. In denominational life and now sometimes even in interdenominational movements, to call a man a fundamentalist is much the same as saying that the spirit and work of the Church would be improved by his removal. Perhaps it had better be stated clearly that fundamentalists—as indeed, any one else—will not be persuaded by ridicule. They are not going to be enlisted by unbridled accusations. They are not to be impressed by pictures of the Church which always depict them in caricature. A segregation imposed by bias will not elicit their joyful participation. They are not trying to be “fundamentalists” for they are at a loss to see why they should aspire to any other name than that of Christian. Their only ulterior motive is to see Jesus Christ as Lord of all. It ought not to be hard to understand their bewilderment when even within their own communions they find their proffered comradeship in the Cross of Christ brushed aside in favor of closer ties with others who openly and unashamedly deny the Son of God.

REASONABLE CHRISTIANS

Those who are called fundamentalists are not sustained by a martyr complex. Their comfort is that in both body and soul they belong to their faithful Saviour, Jesus Christ, who gave himself for them. They have no alternative but to give themselves for him; they want to do so within the churches that have been their spiritual homes. At one point they would be emphatically clear: they will bear witness to their Lord. They are certainly entitled to ask the question whether the nature of the unity being sought—and so far as possible, imposed—is such that even one who would accept the label “fundamentalist” may be welcomed as a responsible Christian, whose faith and dedication are not to be continually singled out for suspicion and disparagement. In denominational life and program, in the concept of the Church, in the nature of the unity we are seeking for Christians, is there room for a fundamentalist?

Jacob J. Vellenga served on the National Board of Administration of the United Presbyterian Church from 1948–54. Since 1958 he has served the United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. as Associate Executive. He holds the A.B. degree from Monmouth College, the B.D. from Pittsburgh-Xenia Seminary, Th.D. from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and D.D. from Monmouth College, Illinois.

Have something to add about this? See something we missed? Share your feedback here.