Protestant Fundamentalism & Catholicism.
It should be no shock to anyone who reads my blog that I have some issues with Protestant Fundamentalism. I think there are many toxic forces at work in countless churches that are the farthest thing from God's will and destructive to the people involved in these groups. This post is not really about those issues, however. This addresses a logical fallacy that results from the fundamentalist viewpoint.
The fundamentlaist asserts that all authority for religious and moral matters rests upon the Bible and their subsequent interpretation of it. The latter part of this statement results in the division and diversity that you see in the protestant world, as numerous groups and individuals interpret different (and often key) passages differently. it becomes a hit and miss game, largely based upon traditions and opinions, what suits an individual is what makes up their interpretation. Regardless, the bible remains the sole authority. . .the doctrine of "Sola Scriptura" as the early Protestant Reformers called it (by Scripture Alone) is the battle cry for fundamentalists everywhere.
There is only one small problem with this concept. The Bible is a product of the Catholic Church.
Yes, that is right. The Bible as we have it today. . .the 66 books that are considered by Fundamentalists to be their sole authority was collected, canonized, edited, translated, and preserved entirely by the Catholic church. While there may be manuscripts that date to the late second century (over a hundred years after their alleged composition), there are no extant copies of the original manuscripts, nor even first or second generation copies. In fact, the books that are considered to be Canon of the NT, were only ascribed as such by early church fathers IN RESPONSE TO the writings of opposing teachers (such as Marcion) to say "no, HIS list of writings is not the "official" list of scripture, OURS is". It is also noteworthy that the "orthodox" Church, later to become the "Catholic" Church actually had manuscripts that taught things contrary to their doctrine to be destroyed. . .burned. . .lost forever Who KNOWS what these writings contained?
Now, I don;t intend for this to be an indictment of the Catholic church by any stretch (I'll save that for another time--LOL), but simply to point out that the only reason the Bible, the NT, exists at all, is because of the authority of the Catholic Church.
The Bible was made by the Church, plain and simple. . .not the other way around.
Yet Protestant Fundamentalists reject the authority of the Catholic church. By doing so, they also reject the Authority of the Bible. . .you can't have one without the other. . .plain and simple.
I have long asserted that Protestant Fundamentalism requires a degree of mental acrobatics, what Orwell called "Doublethink" to maintain it's integrity. One more example of how absolutist thinking is dangerous to the mind and to the soul.
To my religious friends, please do not take this as an attack on your faith, but as evidence that all religions have more in common than we like to think. . .All religions require a leap of faith. . .the chasam that we leap may differ from group to group and person to person, but the final analysis is that there are no absolute proofs in religion. The Fundamentalist, who asserts that faith in the Bible or faith in Jesus or faith in Christianity or whatever, is standing on the same shaky ground of faith that the Muslim, the Buddhist, the Deist, etc is. . .unable to prove anything, but hoping for a better way.
The fundamentlaist asserts that all authority for religious and moral matters rests upon the Bible and their subsequent interpretation of it. The latter part of this statement results in the division and diversity that you see in the protestant world, as numerous groups and individuals interpret different (and often key) passages differently. it becomes a hit and miss game, largely based upon traditions and opinions, what suits an individual is what makes up their interpretation. Regardless, the bible remains the sole authority. . .the doctrine of "Sola Scriptura" as the early Protestant Reformers called it (by Scripture Alone) is the battle cry for fundamentalists everywhere.
There is only one small problem with this concept. The Bible is a product of the Catholic Church.
Yes, that is right. The Bible as we have it today. . .the 66 books that are considered by Fundamentalists to be their sole authority was collected, canonized, edited, translated, and preserved entirely by the Catholic church. While there may be manuscripts that date to the late second century (over a hundred years after their alleged composition), there are no extant copies of the original manuscripts, nor even first or second generation copies. In fact, the books that are considered to be Canon of the NT, were only ascribed as such by early church fathers IN RESPONSE TO the writings of opposing teachers (such as Marcion) to say "no, HIS list of writings is not the "official" list of scripture, OURS is". It is also noteworthy that the "orthodox" Church, later to become the "Catholic" Church actually had manuscripts that taught things contrary to their doctrine to be destroyed. . .burned. . .lost forever Who KNOWS what these writings contained?
Now, I don;t intend for this to be an indictment of the Catholic church by any stretch (I'll save that for another time--LOL), but simply to point out that the only reason the Bible, the NT, exists at all, is because of the authority of the Catholic Church.
The Bible was made by the Church, plain and simple. . .not the other way around.
Yet Protestant Fundamentalists reject the authority of the Catholic church. By doing so, they also reject the Authority of the Bible. . .you can't have one without the other. . .plain and simple.
I have long asserted that Protestant Fundamentalism requires a degree of mental acrobatics, what Orwell called "Doublethink" to maintain it's integrity. One more example of how absolutist thinking is dangerous to the mind and to the soul.
To my religious friends, please do not take this as an attack on your faith, but as evidence that all religions have more in common than we like to think. . .All religions require a leap of faith. . .the chasam that we leap may differ from group to group and person to person, but the final analysis is that there are no absolute proofs in religion. The Fundamentalist, who asserts that faith in the Bible or faith in Jesus or faith in Christianity or whatever, is standing on the same shaky ground of faith that the Muslim, the Buddhist, the Deist, etc is. . .unable to prove anything, but hoping for a better way.
31 Comments:
you keep blogging about religion. maybe you should blog about faith.
anonymous:
what do you mean? Can you explain your request a bit more?
Leo
Well, Anon., I thought that I had actually been pretty good about that. . .Hit the archives and check a few of the things out that I am sure you have seen before. . .I think that I have been pretty open about many of the things that I beleive. . .
In addition, I think that the juxtaposition between faith and religion is obvious from this and other posts. I beleive faith is a highly individual thing and as such should preclude judgement. . .Judgement can only occur when evidence is presented beyond a reasonable doubt. i think that the burden of proof lays upon religion, not upon faith, for it is religion which attempts to dictate what "truth" is, what people should and should not believe, and how people should or should not live their lives. Religion is, and always has been, about power and control. Faith is about personal development and an attempt to understand that which can not be empirically proven.
I have no criticism for faith. Your faith is as equally valid as mine, for we all are attempting to understand the metaphysical. Religion seeks to rigidly define that, and is in my opinion, the enemy of faith.
SOME "Religion seeks to rigidly define that, and is in my opinion, the enemy of faith."
Religion is not a building or someone else's rules as to who or what you should believe in.
Religion is a unique relationship between you and the God that you choose to serve.
Anyone who dictates what you should believe and then condemns you to hell because you don't believe it will have a lot more questions to answer than the person who is truly searching for understanding.
"Knock and the door will be opened, seek and you shall find..."
Keep searching.
Very good post, Thomas.
Thank you.
http://z6.invisionfree.com/denominations
Thanks Wren. . I appreciate your continued patronage--LOL
Anonymous. . .I hear what you are saying. . .but the question goes back to two things--
First of all, when I am discussiong "Religion" I am not talking about faith and beleifs (which are personal) but discussing SYSTEMS of belief--which are mandated or dictated by others. As you and I are aware, there are MANY MANY forces which attempt to magistrate one's personal relationship with God. it is this sort of approach that I am discussing. Please do not misunderstand, I am not saying that every single religious group is all about power and control, but many (if not most) remain more deeply rooted in religious politics than they do in relationship and community.
The other point, is that this particular post is examining what people use as the FOUNDATION of their religion (or their faith, if you will). Historically, the Bible is a Catholic invention. The collection and canonization of the New Testament, the exclusion of other understandings of God and Christ was NOT performed by the Apostles or the first or second Century Christians--It was done in the LATE Fourth Century by the Catholic Church. It seems strange to me that one would accept the Bible, yet reject the Authority which developed it. If the Catholic Church had the divine authority to canonize the bible, why would it not have the authority to legislate religious authority regarding other matters?
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
i didn't say exactly what i wanted to say so i deleted it and now i have to go pick up my 4 year old.
i will be back!
No problem Gena. . .I got your post in an email, and it was just fine! I hear where you are coming from. . .
I have to go pick up MY 4 year old too, and then a run to the Library, and look forward to your comments.
let me again point out, that the key facet of fundamentalism that I am critiquing in this discussion is NOT Using the Bible (or the Quran, ot the Torah, or anything) as a source of faith and strengthening. What I am talking about is the fundamentalist tendency to use the bible as the authority to legislate morality--even for the unbeliever. Fundamentalist state that since they have "The Truth" they therefore have the right to mandate behavior and morality--even personal belief for adherents--
I think that it is wise for those of you in very open and progressive churches to be careful about lumping yourselves into the "Fundamentalist" category. I think that there are many protestant churches who have distanced themselves from that paradigm (thankfully) I am thankful for those Christians who are affiliated with spiritual homes that help them to be compassionate and understanding.
Thanks always for your participation!
so we are on the same page?
and no need to repost my thoughts...
i just think we can all overthink. i am the worst at analyzing -my personal life especially and so many times i hear God say be still. this may be my battle.
and i get frustrated with arguements that seem deterring me back to that battle. does this make sense? so i want to be some sort of free spirit Christian and in some ways i am but when push comes to shove and i am looking at pain in the face my faith proves weak and i doubt. not my God but His ability to change me.
and all this has to do with you is that yes, i agree- we should be careful with what "name" we associate ourselves under- it does matter. but i trust in God's timing and when He directs us to look into that more specifically, i will be more than ready to change. until then we may have bigger battles to fight.
what do you think?
I think that we ARE the same page gena--but I think that being a "free spirit" kind of Christian is really what it is all about--staying focused on community and friends, and family and loving, and being together. If that is indeed your goal, as well as the goal of other readers, then this post is not really directed towards you (or them).
The difficulty is that so many of us come from a heritage that is VERY different than that. Our church of Christ background may betray us in so many areas, since so many segments of that denomination are totally focused on being "right" and salvation all being based on doctrinal soundness, etc.
The c of C has no corner of the market on that tho--the religious world (both Christian and non christian alike) is replete with wave after wave of the superimposition of opinion as fact, and the subsequent mandating of behavior, thoughts, and feelings.
I guess what pricks me to the heart, is that you seem so much to be such a kind sincere person, truly caring for others and wanting to live what you beleive God wants you to be, but there are so many people in so many places who would condemn you, based on their arbitrary interpretation of a book which was developed by a Religious authority that they don't even recognize.
Thanks so much for your comments. I hope you continue to visit!
oh for a perfect world. didn't He say we would be persecuted for righteousness sake? no doubt He knew that church and "religion" would lead to misleadings and misinterpretations of His true intent...
i just keep saying it's so simple and we try so hard to complicate things. God wants us to love. I see people who don't proclaim Him loving better than those of us who do. God sees that and i just want so badly for tHoSe people to give God the glory for their good hearts. Hearts that give and share and are kind and centered on goodness...God is the giver of all good things whether the holder of those good things give Him the credit.
one post i noticed that you said God will use you where you are- and YeS i believe that- of course He does He can do whatever He wants to do with whoever He wants. He's God.
But when that soul gives God the credit for His work thru them, that's when true religion is displayed. In surrendering.
now open your hymnals to 728b
HA- and that's probably one reason why you are no longer in organized religion. right? the overuse of accapella songs :)
Thomas, do you believe Jesus is the son of God, and that he came to save the world?
I dont ask to judge, I am just unclear on what you believe.
Oh heavens to mergataude. . .what a question. . .
I will take the 5th on that one. . .
What I will say is this. . .
The Christian bases their faith in Jesus on the NT Scriptures. . .All evidence outside of those scriptures as to the person and nature of Jesus is Circumstantial at best. If one accepts the Scriptures wholeheartedly, then accepting Jesus as the Son of God, and the bringer of salvation is alot easier.
If one percieves flaws in that source (the NT) or remains unconvinced as to the veracity of Scripture, then to view Jesus in that light becomes much more difficult.
My question in response to you would be this:
If one accepts Jesus as the NT defines him, then would one not recognize the authority of the Catholic Church to determine what veiw of Jesus was "orthodox"? (and believe you me, the early church has ALOT of different veiws of Jesus--take some time and study the books that were considered for canonization and REJECTED. it is quite enlightening.)
If one recognizes Scripture as authoritative in defining the nature and person of Jesus, then one must accept that the institution that defined scripture (The Catholic Church) as authoritative as well.
If I were to return to Christianity, logic and reason would dictate that Catholicism (or Orthodoxy) would be the place to return to.
At this time, I remain skeptical as to the authority of the Catholic church (at present and in the 4th century CE) to define and determine what is or is not "orthodox".
So, I remain,
Your Resident Skeptic,
Thomas J.
It was a yes a yes or no question.
No, not really. . .it wasn't. . .
It was a complex question disgused as a yes or no question.
Religion is full of alot of those.
My experience has taught me that in matters of religion, to give an answer without qualification usualy gets one burned at the stake (sometimes literally). I do think, in this matter ensuring that the reasoning process behind such a life change (and yes, this IS part of the "Why I am no longer a Christian" discussion), is essential.
My question would be, and this is NOT a yes or no question, is why would a person follow the Bible without REALLY understanding how it was derived and developed? And fif one DOES understand how it was developed, Why would they then not defer to the institution which produced the Bible, since the Catholic church did not create the Bible to REPLACE it's authority, but to be an adjunct to it?
Now, don;t get me wrong. . I am not going to mass on sunday. But there IS a logical fallacy that occurs when one accepts the Authority of the Bible, but NOT the Authority of THE Church. (And by that I mean the one that was present in 393 AD at the Council of Hippo--When the NT was actually officially canonized.)
i will admit that i can't keep up with your brain- still i am drawn to your conclusions.
i know nothing about you too- you probably have a stereotype on my head just because i serve God. that is as unfair of you as it is of me to think you are an idiot for not believing. i just keep wanting you to keep it simple but i truly have no idea why you are so hell bent on making it complicated. what happened? i could ask what you read or who have you been influenced by- but the real question is much deeper than that - you don't just read something and develope a basis of your faith that is contrary to your original belief. you have to see it and experience life using this faith to be fully accepting.
do you give God the glory for your musical talent, your child(ren?) or your heart that seems to be soft enough to offer concern for someone you barely know?
i am admittedly intregued by those who are living a honorable life and giving thought to their higher power and still not convinced of the simpleness of His plans for you.
so many times God reminds us to be like children. not in the way of being unknowledgable but watch your 4 year old today and see how he/she? trusts and have needs that she knows you can meet and how she just doesn't worry about how her needs are going to be met. she doesn't doubt you or question whether you are her father- she doesn't ask for a blood test...she knows because YOU are her giver. does it really matter if you are her blood anyway? you give to her all that is good. that is how she knows. not because she has read about how and when she was conceived...
i am just saying there is sooo much in trusting-
and thomas j i am on your side. i wouldn't have spent 20 min. of my busy morning posting here if i wasn't.
Oh Gena--You are too sweet. . .You are truly appreciated and the sentiment of your words are very clear.
You must understand, that I am NOT anti-God, or even Anti-Christian. This is not about believing or even having traditions or fellowshipping.
I have some VERY strong beliefs about God and how He (she or it) interacts in our lives--these beliefs are based on my experience and observations. . .things that I have discovered on my journey--I have documented these things before on this blog (and at length elsewhere on www.thomasjwilson.com.
For me, it is all about understanding WHY people come to believe as they do--none of us grow up in a vaccumm--you asked "what happened" that prompted me to lose my faith, and I could just as easily asked "what happened" that prompted you to suspend critical thinking to accept wholeheartedly the writings of people that you never met, have no witnesses to account for them, and whose writings were selected, redacted, compiled, and kept by an institution that you do NOT trust. (that is, The Catholic Church).
All of us, in matters of faith, must at some point suspend critical thinking and say "well, for this there is no explanation--I must just believe." I do this as well, but admittedly the place on the continuum that I reside is MUCH farther on the skeptic side than it used to be.
One of the questions that I have asked on several religion discussion boards is this:
"If faith is conviction without empirical evidence, How is my faith in God APART from the Bible, any different than your faith in God THRU the Bible?"
I think that you and I are very much the same--The difference is simply that I draw my conviction in God without scriptures or Religion etc. I am convicted in God's presence in my life BECAUSE of these precious children, and this wonderful woman that I share my life with. ..I am convicted int he presence of God BECAUSE of this music that flows Through and and out of me.
Thanks so much for your time--Laundry this morning for me, what about you?
Great post, Thomas, logical and insightful as usual!
I have a book I can't wait to read by one of my favorite Catholic bloggers Mark Shea, it's called "By What Authority," and deals with this very issue. I should be reading it in the next couple weeks (I'm starting a forum and board fast tomorrow for a month, so I should have more time to read, lol!) I might blog about it once I'm done.
This issue was definitely at the heart of my own conversion, since the Bible was so central to our faith as CoCers. Once I finally stopped deluding myself about the history of the Bible, I just couldn't see any other path that made sense. I remember some CoC friends of mine who were trying to help me convert my now hubby to the CoC, and they said, "The most important issue when discussing with Catholics is Authority..." Well, they were right, lol, they just didn't realize where that would lead me! ;-)
God Bless!
Thanks so much Stephanie. . .glad that you chimed in. . I KNEW you would have a great $.02 to add in!
Thanks for the book recommendation. it will go on my list!
are we talking about conviction of the Holy Spirit? in which case yes i am convicted apart from the Bible. of course i am-
i want to respond wisely so i need to think about what you have said more before i respond...
What I am talking about is the common denominator of "Faith". I believe that it is an individuals faith which creates the relationship with God, not adherence to a creed, scripture, doctrine, or theology.
I think that you and I are not dissimilar in that we have faith in what we can not see. You turn to the bible to assist you in focusing that vision. . .I have found that the bible occludes mine. But that is probably another discussion for another time.
I personally wish that we, as people, could dismiss the egocentrism of Religion, and just appreciate others for who they are, and respect their individual faiths as simply an expression of a hunger for God, rather than to resort to some sort of "I'm right, you are wrong" sort of ideology.
Gena, I am looking forward to your continued comments!
Dear TJ:
Keep on blogging about religion!
The only difference between religion and "faith" is that among certain fundamentalist groups, religion is bad word (=catholic.)
This started with a song in the 70's Jesus movement by Scott Wesley Brown who said "I'm not religious, I just love the Lord."
well Catolics call their most spiritual folks "religious", meaning sisters and monks etc.
Thanks so much for stopping by tiber!
Glanced at your profile/blog as well. .I am sure that I will be visiting you and commenting as well! I be you have had an interesting journey!
Keep on Rocking and being real!!!
Good post, TJW. You say, "religion is and has always been about power and control"... and I understand what you mean by that. But, I think "religion" gets a bad rap from people who twist it or us it for their own advantage. Leave the human element out of it and what does it become? I see it as a path to God, a way. It's also an identity. It's a perspective on life, death, and what it all means. It's a collective or communal worship. It's a brotherhood. There is much good in all that, don'cha think?
You clarify a point that I need to make in an upcoming post (my wheels have already been turning--our think-sync remains intact my friend!) in that I need to clarify the point that when I say religion, I am discussing INSTITUTIONALIZED religion. More to come on this!
ok i am back ... -i am not sure what to say. i am not here to convince you that scripture is inspired. that is a journey for you to take and a choice for you to make. that is one of the best things about GOd's personality is that He allows that. I just have to say this though- i don't know what i would do without believing that David was real and that God said his(Davids) heart was like God's...
Jesus is awesome,and my savior-don't misunderstand my worship but He was that- perfect -and as hard as i try i am no where near close to being Jesus. i feel more in tune with a sinner like David. he had a heart that felt extremes and he acted on them and he wrote about them and he sinned and he was forgiven and he was a man after God's own heart after it all.
i learn about God's heart because of him and his passion for music and words and his driven desires. i am drawn to God thru David's realness. Jesus pulled it off flawlessly. my dream? yes. but when i am feeling like the worlds caving in i am calling out like David did, passionately and hopelessly and frustrated- it's then when i know more about God's personality -when i feel David's pain. I feel GOd gets me. the kind of me that I am.
All this is because i believe the Bible is true. and for that i have counsel and much more peace than if i didn't.
i think i may think with my heart more. you are a logic man -right?
that i am not. i am about fantasy as heartbreaking as it is at times. God is that though -my fantasy- and making Him go from a to b to c sometimes just doesn't work. i guess that's my kind of faith. i believe in something that just doesn't make sence. bottem line. but it makes all the sence in the world to me.
Gena, you are just too precious. .and I admire and respect your faith so much! Everything that you have posted here just screams sincerity. You will hear no critique of that at all.
One of the things that I think is not coming thru loud and clear in this discussion is this--I am NOT seeking to denigrate or condemn another's faith--In fact, I am trying to point out just the opposite.
I propose that all of us who stand on faith--who have individual belief systems which guide our lives are on the same spiritual ground. What I hear you saying is that in spite of logic and reason, you BELIEVE--your HEART and SOUL declare to you that what you have been brought up to beleive, or what you have come to beleive in CHristianity is true. since it is something as intangiable and unmeasurable as intuition, feeling, spirit, etc, there is no way to argue against that--it would be quite futile, as well as completely unnecessary. Your faith is leading you to good things--to a sense of community, to fellowship with others, to a good moral life, and for concerns for others--most importantly, to a way of living where you are able to feel and see god's presence in your life more clearly. Why would I want to diminish that.
However, Religion frequently tends to be polarizing. Frequently religion tends to function in absolutes. In the c of C, we were brought up with the concept of their being ONE RIGHT WAY (to the exclusion of all others). It is against this concept that I contend--Christianity, your membership at Cross Point, the Bible all appear to undoubtedly be what is just right for you and your family.
my point is, that what is true for you may not very well be UNIVERSALLY true for all people--If we were to get into a theological pissing match, which required empirical, historical, or logical verification and "proof", then the Christian Faith system (and pretty much ALL faith systems) would come up lacking. The flaw of fundamentalism is just that--that there is some sort of absolute, irrefutable PROOF that the Christian faith system is absolutely right for ALL people. This is inconsistent and unprovable.
This applies to fundamentalism in ALL it's forms--Not just Christian Fundamentalism--This is true for Islamic Fundamentalism, Atheist Absolutism, etc. Absolutism is dangerous in that it tries to minimze the huge diversity of the human expereince to fit into one set of ideologies, scriptures, creeds, or definitions.
I don;t think that your faith is wrong, or silly, or flawed, Gena--No more than Mine or anybody else's. It is simply different. And that is ok. it is the diversity that gives us strength and makes this discussion so nice and fulfilling. I simply encourage ALL beleivers to be respectful and tolerant of others--even those of differing beleifs, as we are all in the same boat of trying to find ways to understand the infinite.
why do you insist on patronizing me?
what if i started my comments
"you are so precious thomas j..."
btw, thank you- you are right- i truly am...but beside the point.
i am thankful to you for giving me such an interesting thing to do for the past few days. i am stretched as i hope you are too.
If you started your comments that way?
I would accept it in the spirit it was meant. . .sincere appreciation--No patronization intended. . .I truly DO appreciate the kindness and gentleness that you have exhibited thru this conversation! I think you are great!
Thanks again for all of your comments!
for a different perspective check out www.protestant-gazette.blogspot.com
Post a Comment
<< Home