Ten things on Fundamentalism & the Reformed Faith

1. Fundamentalism began as a reaction against theological Liberalism. The Reformed faith started as an attempt to bring the Catholic Church back to the doctrine and practice of Scripture.

2. Fundamentalists tend not to respect tradition. The Reformed hold to the supreme authority of Scripture, but value what the church has taught about God's truth in the past.

3. Fundamentalism has a minimalist approach to creeds and confessions of faith. The movement can be suspicious of theological scholarship. The Reformed faith is expressed in elaborate, all-embracing documents such as The Westminster Confession, The Savoy Declaration and The 1689 Baptist Confession. Typically, Calvinists have a high regard for theological study.

4. Fundamentalism makes little distinction between secondary issues and foundational gospel truth. This can make the movement unnecessarily divisive and sectarian. The Reformed insist on the essential gospel truth of God's saving grace in Christ. But they allow for liberty of conscience on adiaphora (things indifferent).

5. Fundamentalism is often stridently dispensationalist and premillenialist in its eschatology. The Reformed faith teaches covenant theology and is usually amillenialist. But some prominent Reformed theologians are postmillenialists and even premillenialists. It should be noted that Calvin said of Chilialism (premillenialism) "This fiction is too puerile to need or deserve refutation." Institutes III:XXV:5. (Sorry, John "All self-respecting Calvinists are premill" MacAthur and followers, but there it is).

6. Fundamentalsim reads the Bible in a literalistic way. Reformed expositors hold that Scripture should be interpreted in the light of the analogy of faith, taking into account grammatical, literary and contextual concerns.

7. Fundamentalism tends to be legalistic, teaching that the Christian life is largely about keeping the rules. Reformed theology has sought to develop a Biblical doctrine of sanctification that is rooted in the believer's union with Christ and the work of the Spirit. The law is a guide to right conduct, but the dynamic of the Christian life is the Spirit of Christ in the life of the believer.

8. Fundamentalism often has a very negative view of culture and the arts. Reformed teaching recognises that all human life is affected by sin, but God, in his "common grace", blesses society with many good things. These good aspects of culture and the arts are to be valued and enjoyed to the glory of God.

9. Fundamentalism is usually allied to right-wing politics. Reformed believers may be found supporting many different political parties. Reformed Christians have campaigned against slavery and racial intolerance. They have worked for a better society, including improved conditions for workers and free education and healthcare for all. The Reformed theologian, Francis Schaeffer was an early advocate of ecological concerns.

10. Fundamentalists share many important truths in common with Reformed believers such as a commitment to the authority and inerrancy of Scripture and salvation through Christ alone. Theological liberalism is a much greater danger to the church than fundamentalism. We may disagree with Fundamentalists, but we should respect and love them as fellow-Christians.

John Calvin on Christian Liberty

For some, this may sound like an unlikely topic. John Calvin on Christian liberty? Might as well consider Oliver Cromwell on the divine right of kings! What's that old disciplinarian, got to say about the subject of Christian freedom? Quite a lot actually. He devotes a chapter to this theme in his Institutes of the Christian Religion - Book III:XIX. Indeed, he says, "if the subject be not understood, neither Christ, not the truth of the Gospel, nor the inward peace of the soul is properly known." (Sect. 1.)

The basis of Christian freedom is justification by faith. The believer is free from the accusations of the law of God, having been justified by grace through faith in Christ. The Epistle to the Galatians is the great charter of Christian liberty. Paul teaches that believers have been freed from the ceremonies of the law such as circumcision. We have also been liberated from the curse of the law in Christ who was made a curse for us. The law reveals the way in which Christians should live, but it cannot condemn us:

For when the conscience feels anxious as to how it may have the favour of God...if brought to his judgement seat... the requirements of the law are not to be brought forward, but Christ, who surpasses all the perfection of the law, is alone to be held forth for righteousness. (Sect. 3.)

We are not free to sin because we have been called by the grace of God to righteousness and holiness. But we do have freedom when it comes to adiaphora or things indifferent. This is a very important point, "The knowledge of this liberty is very necessary to us; where it is wanting our consciences will have no rest, there will be no end of superstition." (Sect. 7). Believers are fee to eat, drink and wear what they please. These things were written against the background where Roman Catholic traditions like eating fish not meat on Fridays were observed by many people. Such matters are adiaphora - the Christian is free to do as he likes with regard to such issues. We are not bound by the traditions of men. Calvin also deals with the tendency toward asceticism in those who have not grasped the principle of Christian liberty,

If he hesitates as to a more genial wine, he will scarce drink the worst with a good conscience; at last he will dare not to touch water if more than usually sweet and pure. In fine, he will come to this, that he will deem it criminal to trample on a straw lying in his way. (Sect. 7.)

Liberty is to be used responsibly. We are not to abuse our freedom by offending the conscience of the weaker brother. On the other hand, we must not to yield to Pharisaical types who would seek to rob us of our true freedom in Christ.

Christian liberty is one of the precious fruits of the gospel. But this important principle has often been forgotten in the history of the Church. Who said that believers should abstain from meat on Fridays or than Ministers should not marry? We are called to freedom in such cases.

The Evangelical Church is not without fault in this matter. Christian holiness has sometimes been reduced to a list prohibitions. These often concern things that are adiaphora at best. "Thou shalt not drink alcohol!" "Thou shalt not go to the Cinema!" "Thou shalt not listen to rock or pop music!" Oh really? Why then does Psalm 104 tell us that God has given us wine to "gladden the heart"? (vs 15). Are Christians really forbidden to watch all films? Why can't a believer enjoy Coldplay just as much as Chopin or listen to Snow Patrol rather than Shostakovitch?

A believer will be discriminating about what he watches and listens to. But the blanket prohibition of all alcohol, movie-going and pop music is a violation of Christian liberty. Fundamentalism has often been guilty of a legalistic approach to holiness. This can make the Christian life seem joyless and unattractive. Evangelicals need to embrace the principles of gospel liberty set out so clearly by John Calvin.

Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage. (Galatians 5:1)

Fundamentalism

Fundamentalists are the bogeymen of the post-modern world. They challenge the easy-going relativism of our times by claiming to possess Truth. How outrageous! A Fundamentalist is at best a not very nice, opinionated bigot and at worst a murderous hate-preaching terrorist.

Liberal Theology

Bible believing Christians are often labelled Fundamentalists in the media. But are Evangelicals really Fundamentalists? In once sense we are because we believe in the fundamental truths of the Christian faith. But in another sense, Evangelicals are quite different from Fundamentalist Christians. Christian Fundamentalism was originally an American phenomenon with its roots in late 19th Century revivalism (See Revival & Revivalism by Iain H Murray Banner of Truth Trust). By the 1920's the Fundamentalist agenda was becoming increasingly clear. Fundamentalism was a reaction to the rationalism of Liberal Theology. Fundamentalists rightly saw that Liberal Theology was attempting to accommodate the Christian faith to the anti-supernaturalist assumptions of the Enlightenment. For Liberal Theologians, the Bible was not a God-inspired text, but a human document that was capable of inspiring us with thoughts of the divine. Jesus' virgin birth, miracles, atoning death and resurrection were dismissed by Liberals as inventions of the Early Church. For them the "Jesus of history" was very different from the New Testament "Christ of faith". The problem with Fundamentalism is not that the early leaders of the movement endeavoured to defend the historic Christian faith from the onslaught of Liberal Theology. The difficulty is one of spirit and method.

.

Anti-intellectualism

Fundamentalists tended to denounce Liberal Theology rather than engage with it in a responsible, scholarly way. The approach of Reformed Evangelicals such as Gresham Machen and B. B. Warfield was very different. These men produced well-argued, scholarly works in order to defend historic Christian doctrines. They gave thinking Christians a Biblically robust, intellectually coherent response to Theological liberalism. This was in the tradition of Calvin and the Reformers, who did not simply denounce and lambast Roman Catholic teaching. They understood it and were able to demonstrate clearly where Rome had departed from Scripture. Fundamentalists could warn of the dangers of Liberalism and tell their people to avoid it like the plague. But they lost the Theological argument by failing to engage in it. Fundamentalism tended to be anti-intellectual with little room for Theology or Biblical scholarship. The sad result of this was that intelligent conservative Christians became disillusioned with Fundamentalism and embraced Liberal thinking.

.

Quirks

The Fundamentalist movement was characterized by several doctrinal quirks. Dispensationalism. This view was popularised by the Scofield Bible, the official Fundamentalist text. Dispensationalism involves an extremely literalistic premillenial view of the last things. Christ will reign on earth for 1000 years, during which time the Temple will be rebuilt at Jerusalem etc. This view of the last things tends to lead to political Zionism. Premillenialism was often regarded as a test of orthodoxy by Fundamentalists.

The Holiness Movement. This view of the Christian life was popularised in the UK's Keswick Conference. They key idea is that Christians should stop struggling to mortify sin by the power of the Spirit and simply "Let go and let God". Sanctification could be achieved in one spectacular crisis experience. Fundamentalism could often be rather legalistic on issues such as alcohol consumption, cinema going and popular music. Fundamentalism was culturally disengaged.

Hyper-Separatism. As well as separating from those who deny basic Bible doctrines, Fundamentalists tended to fall out over secondary matters such as the precise details of premillenialism.

.

Fundamentalists & Evangelicals

Evangelicals may have some important things in common with Fundamentalists. But our Biblical, Reformation heritage helps to deliver us from the Theological shallowness that often characterised Fundamentalism. Engagement with Puritan spirituality keeps us from the aberrations of "Holiness Teaching". The Reformed emphasis on the sovereignty of God over the whole of life is a safeguard against cultural disengagement. Evangelicals (not to say Christian Fundamentalists) are certainly not to be compared with terrorists! The great fundamental of the Christian faith is "love one another."