CATHOLIC VIEW OF FUNDAMENTALISM - PETER KREEFT
Mark T
....
Even though many fundamentalists think the Catholic Church is under the
control of Satan and all or most Catholics are headed for hell, not all
think that - and we shouldn't think the same of them.
....
Sometimes you even find fundamentalists claiming divine inspiration for the
King James version! The serious motive behind this foolish idea is to hold
the line against Modernism even in translation. For many modern translations
of the Bible are not translations at all but interpretations or paraphrases
using the dubious principle of "dynamic equivalence" - i.e., the translator
imagines what the writer would have written if he'd written modern English,
rather than translating the actual words he did write. The fundamentalist's
concern for word-for-word fidelity, though extreme, seems less mistaken than
the revisionist's fast-and-loose guesses.
....
(4) The crucial difference between fundamentalists and Catholics concerns
the sufficiency of Scripture, Luther's principle of "sola scriptura." The
fundamentalists insists he needs no Church to interpret Scripture, for he
contends that (a) Scripture is clear, or that (b) it interprets itself, or
that (c) the Holy Spirit interprets it directly to him.
All three substitutes for the Church are easily shown to be inadequate: (a)
Scripture is not clear, as it itself admits (2 Pet. 3:15-16). After all, if
it's so clear, why are there 500 different Protestant denominations, each
claiming to be faithful to Scripture? (b) Nor does Scripture interpret
itself, except on occasion, when a New Testament author quotes or refers to
an Old Testament passage, (c) Finally, heretics all claim the Holy Spirit's
guidance, too. To rely on a private, personal criterion has been perilous
and divisive throughout history.
....
(6) The weakest plank in the fundamentalist's platform is surely his
insistence on a literal interpretation of everything in the Bible - or
almost everything. Even fundamentalists cannot take Jesus parables or
metaphors like "I am the door" literally Fundamentalists specialize in
literal interpretation of the beginning and end of the Bible, Genesis and
Revelation, thus opening evolutionistic and eschatological cans of worms.
Though Genesis itself suggests some sort of evolution (1:20a; 24a; 2:7a), it's
a dirty word for fundamentalists. And though Jesus Himself does not know
when the world will end (Matt. 24:36), fundamentalists love to make rash
predictions - all of them wrong.
Here the fundamentalist makes the same mistake as the Modernist: confusing
objective interpretation with personal belief, interpreting Scripture in
light of his own beliefs rather than those of the author's. The literary
style of Genesis 1-3 and Revelation are clearly symbolic, just as the
miracle stories are clearly literal. Fundamentalist and Modernist alike fail
to remove their colored glasses when they read.
Fundamentalists also confuse literalness with authority, fearing that if you
interpret a passage nonliterally, you remove its authority. But this isn't
so; one can make an authoritative point in symbolic language, e.g. about the
power ("the strong right hand") of God.
One passage no fundamentalist ever interprets literally, however, is "This
is my Body." The fundamentalist suddenly turns as symbolic as a Modernist
when it comes to the Eucharist.
........
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Kreeft, Peter. "Fundamentalists." National Catholic Register. (October,
1988).
Reprinted by permission of the author. To subscribe to the National Catholic
Register call 1-800-421-3230.
THE AUTHOR
Peter Kreeft has written extensively (over 25 books) in the areas of
Christian apologetics. ...
Peter Kreeft teaches at Boston College in Boston Massachusetts. He is on the
Advisory Board of the Catholic Educator's Resource Center.
Copyright © 1988 National Catholic Register
Eric Fisher
i happen to own some of peter kreefts books and enjoy his writings. this
was a pretty good piece.
..eric