Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Catholic Living in the Modern World => Topic started by: 800 Cruiser on September 26, 2018, 12:17:36 AM
-
Wondering what your thoughts are on the concept of being fundamental.
Not quite sure where I am going with it so...
-
I think perhaps it is because I try to sweep all considerations off the table except the “meat” of the matter at hand.
Perhaps fundamentalist is too strong a word...maybe I should go with something like bottom line.
-
Wondering what your thoughts are on the concept of being fundamental.
Not quite sure where I am going with it so...
The term 'fundamentalist' is usually applied to a Christian, Catholic or Protestant, who takes the creation revealed in Genesis literally.
Accordingly I am a 'fundamentalist' liker many others on this forum.
I rather like being called a fundamentalist, sts like being called a traditionalist. All Christians were fundamentalists up to the 17th century when Copernicus and Galileo started the Modernist reformation. For example, St Thomas Aquinas could be called a fundamentalist today.
-
It is a Protestant term. Period.
-
It is a Protestant term. Period.
Yes, exactly this.
-
Yes, the Protestants own the term in the public mind.
But it literally comes from the Latin word for foundation -- as in, these people have beliefs. They have a foundation and set of beliefs they actually live by.
A short definition of fundamentalist is "real", "serious about it", or "someone who lets his beliefs dictate his daily behavior".
As you can see, being fundamentalist is actually quite necessary for any Catholic who is any kind of serious about saving his soul.
The opposite of fundamentalist is "mainstream" which basically means "I don't have any practical beliefs; my daily life is indistinguishable from any pagan or atheist in this country."
We could have divided Catholics that way -- mainstream Catholic = Novus Ordo, and fundamentalist Catholic = Trad Catholic.
But although it works in theory, it wouldn't work because the public use and ownership of these words must be considered. The whole point of words is to convey ideas.
-
Another way to look at it --
Any religion or person adhering to a religion who isn't "fundamentalist" is a joke, plain and simple.
If your religion doesn't make your lifestyle different from others who DON'T follow that religion, your religion is a social club at best and a complete farce; a complete joke.
-
It is best to use the term "Traditionalist" where there is no ambiguity.
The term "Fundamentalist" is now being used disparagingly against Protestants, Muslims, and Buddhists.
Normally, I would use solid references, but in the interest of time, I am using these references from the liberals themselves to show their agenda.
From Wikipedia:
Islamic fundamentalism has been defined as a movement of Muslims who think back to earlier times and seek to return to the fundamentals of the religion and live similarly to how the prophet Muhammad and his companions lived. More at Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_fundamentalism)
Buddhist fundamentalism has also targeted other religious and ethnic groups, such as that in Myanmar.As a Buddhist dominated nation, Myanmar has seen recent tensions between Muslim minorities and the Buddhist majority, especially during the 2013 Burma anti-Muslim riots, alleged [by whom?] to have been instigated by hardliner groups such as the 969 Movement.
From https://www.britannica.com/topic/fundamentalism
Fundamentalism, type of militantly conservative (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conservative) religious movement characterized by the advocacy (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/advocacy) of strict conformity to sacred texts. Once used exclusively to refer to American Protestants who insisted on the inerrancy of the Bible, the term fundamentalism was applied more broadly beginning in the late 20th century to a wide variety of religious movements. Indeed, in the broad sense of the term, many of the major religions of the world may be said to have fundamentalist movements.
Thus, you can see from the Liberals and Freemasons who control the content at Wikipedia and Britannica, that Fundamentalism is now a disparaging term -- a term to describe radicalized religious cults -- those who have become terrorists.
If we call ourselves fundamentalists, then we are agreeing with the CIA and leftists that we have become radicalized when we have not.
-
A Catholic cannot be a fundamentalist as it is understood in this day and age.
Definition: a person who believes in the strict, literal interpretation of scripture in a religion.
Case in point. At the time of Joseph in Egypt it states the world was in famine says the Bible. For the fundamentalist that literally means the Mayans were starving also in Central America.
In Catholic belief it means the known world of Egypt, Palestine, Arabia suffered famine.
Christ also said destroy this temple and it will be raised up in three days. Jєωs took it as the TEMPLE. Christ meant it to be him. The Jєωs were clueless because they always thought in the material world not the spiritual world.
Another point. The Bible doesn't mention anything about dinosaurs so they didn't occur. The bones were put their by Satan say the Protestant fundamentalists. Nothing in the Bible about Neanderthals, so they didn't exist. Put there by Satan again.
-
You're confusing the fact that Protestants were in error (example, Sola Scriptura) with the fact that they have beliefs.
Of course any other fundamentalist besides Catholics are going to be in error.
But the fact that we take our religion seriously, believe it's true for EVERYONE (whether they accept it or not), are anxious to spread it, are militant about it, bring it into our daily lives -- those are traits we share with any other "fundamentalist" group.
The fact that Protestants are ignorant about this or that has nothing to do with the term Fundamentalist.
Long story short, "fundamentalist protestant" just means "real protestant" or "protestant who actually takes his religion seriously". But no one ever said "real protestants" weren't in error.
So-called "Mainstream Protestants" (the only other type, besides "fundamentalist" protestants) are just like any other non-Christian, and so they are a joke. I don't even consider them to have a religion.
The only protestant worthy of the name is a fundamentalist protestant. Likewise, the only Muslim worthy of the name is a fundamentalist Muslim. If they look/act/dress/marry/live like those outside of their religion, how can they identify with that religion?
-
You're confusing the fact that Protestants were in error (example, Sola Scriptura) with the fact that they have beliefs.
Of course any other fundamentalist besides Catholics are going to be in error.
But the fact that we take our religion seriously, believe it's true for EVERYONE (whether they accept it or not), are anxious to spread it, are militant about it, bring it into our daily lives -- those are traits we share with any other "fundamentalist" group.
The fact that Protestants are ignorant about this or that has nothing to do with the term Fundamentalist.
Long story short, "fundamentalist protestant" just means "real protestant" or "protestant who actually takes his religion seriously". But no one ever said "real protestants" weren't in error.
So-called "Mainstream Protestants" (the only other type, besides "fundamentalist" protestants) are just like any other non-Christian, and so they are a joke. I don't even consider them to have a religion.
The only protestant worthy of the name is a fundamentalist protestant. Likewise, the only Muslim worthy of the name is a fundamentalist Muslim. If they look/act/dress/marry/live like those outside of their religion, how can they identify with that religion?
On the contrary, Matthew, the leftists and the Deep State are claiming that all fundamentalists are rigid fundamentally unstable and radicalized terrorists.
The term "fundamentalist" has become a trigger word, one that we should not appropriate for ourselves as we would be labeling ourselves to be psychologically unstable with a very rigid black and white mentality. Those who are rigid fundamentalists believe very much like the Dimonds. Anyone who disagrees with the Dimonds on any point is labeled a "heretic."
-
It is a Protestant term. Period.
Does that answer your question, 800?....I didn't think so. ;)
-
On the contrary, Matthew, the leftists and the Deep State are claiming that all fundamentalists are rigid fundamentally unstable and radicalized terrorists.
The term "fundamentalist" has become a trigger word, one that we should not appropriate for ourselves as we would be labeling ourselves to be psychologically unstable with a very rigid black and white mentality. Those who are rigid fundamentalists believe very much like the Dimonds. Anyone who disagrees with the Dimonds on any point is labeled a "heretic."
Again, you're missing the point.
1. I'm not suggesting we adopt the term. It is already taken by various groups. I've said explicitly (many times) you can't fight reality in this regard. We can't stubbornly call ourselves gαy because "darn it, I'm happy! ...and I'll die before I surrender this innocent term to the sodomites!" That would be foolish. Reality is reality.
2. I don't criticize the Dimonds for having beliefs (being fundamentalist). The problem is that their BELIEFS contain error -- namely, that God requires Sedevacantism as a dogma of Faith, required for salvation, that any layman can excommunicate others and declare them vitandus (to be avoided), etc.
But insofar as the Dimonds have beliefs which dictate their lives, they should be commended -- or at least they should be acknowledged as having a legitimate claim to the term "Traditional Catholic" since they seem to take their religion very seriously.
All I'm saying is that someone who isn't TRULY fundamental doesn't really have a religion, because religion requires beliefs that you strongly believe in.
I don't think "fundamental" necessarily includes error, violence, irrationality, or lay excommunication. What it does include, in all cases, is a strong, practical adherence to a belief system.
-
What we have to ask ourselves:
What does "fundamentalist" mean? It can't mean "wanting to blow others up", because that only applies to "fundamentalist Muslim".
Whatever the adjective truly means, it would have to apply to:
fundamentalist muslim
fundamentalist protestant
fundamentalist Catholic (though I don't suggest we use this term)
fundamentalist Baptist
etc.
-
It is a Protestant term. Period.
Yes. Historically, the term arose among Protestants in a reaction against modernism. While Catholics had clear papal teachings against this error, some Protestants also attempted to fight it. The name is related to a group of Protestants defining 5 fundamental beliefs necessary to be a Christian:
- Biblical inspiration (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_inspiration) and the infallibility of scripture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_infallibility) as a result of this
- Virgin birth of Jesus (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_birth_of_Jesus)
- Belief that Christ's death was the atonement (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atonement_in_Christianity) for sin
- Bodily resurrection of Jesus (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resurrection_of_Jesus)
- Historical reality of the miracles of Jesus (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracles_of_Jesus)
Over time, other beliefs became attached to Fundamentalist Christianity and "fundamentalist" became a pejorative term to describe any religion. It reflects the negative view of religion common in secular culture.
-
Lovely responses, one and all.
And (lol), no, it didn’t answer my question. This is because I’ve left the question open ended. Think of it as a pick your brain kind of thing.
No. I’m not trying to be controversial—rather I really am here to pick every brain available with legitimate questions that I have.
I do not remember exactly how the line went, but in The Three Musketeers, dartagnan in his haste at one point exclaims that he PERCIEVES he is being insulted. This concept of perception has affected my thinking greatly.
If I can get another persons perception that can help me with my own.
-
.
Since you never finished your opening statement it makes you look insincere.
-
Understood sir.
And I agree in general that is what this kind of thing appears to be.
I assure you that I am most sincere however. Anything that I put up anywhere comes from my heart and a genuine desire to expand my knowledge and understanding.
I have all these thoughts and questions in my head, and certainly I do much better at typing them than speaking them, but even given that I sometimes find myself unable to truly articulate what is in my head.
Therefore I beg of everyone here (on Cathinfo) to temporarily withhold judgement upon me until you have several posts of mine under your belt, that you may come to see me and my style.
Again, Neil, valid point and good observation.
-
Here is Pope Francis on the subject: I think he was talking about me.
https://www.christianpost.com/news/pope-francis-slams-fundamentalist-catholics-who-believe-in-absolute-truth-151350/ (https://www.christianpost.com/news/pope-francis-slams-fundamentalist-catholics-who-believe-in-absolute-truth-151350/)
Pope Francis has slammed fundamentalism across religions, but warned that there are many Roman Catholics who believe they have "absolute truth" and are fundamentalists themselves.
The Vatican leader took aim at fundamentalism within the Church during an in-flight press conference at the conclusion of his three-country tour of Africa, calling it a "sickness that is in all religions."
"We Catholics have some [on Catholic Info Forum] — and not some, many — who believe they possess the absolute truth and go ahead dirtying the other with calumny, with disinformation, and doing evil. They do evil. I say this because it is my Church," the pope said, according to Catholic News Service (http://www.catholicnews.com/services/englishnews/2015/pope-says-he-was-surprised-by-crowds-joy-in-africa.cfm)
Pope Francis has slammed fundamentalism across religions, but warned that there are many Roman Catholics who believe they have "absolute truth" and are fundamentalists themselves.
The Vatican leader took aim at fundamentalism within the Church during an in-flight press conference at the conclusion of his three-country tour of Africa, calling it a "sickness that is in all religions."
-
Lovely responses, one and all.
And (lol), no, it didn’t answer my question. This is because I’ve left the question open ended. Think of it as a pick your brain kind of thing.
In the second post in this thread, you said: "Perhaps fundamentalist is too strong a word...maybe I should go with something like bottom line."
In a nutshell, for Catholics the bottom line is the faith. The true, orthodox, holy, Catholic and Apostolic faith which is what we must continually strive to grow in our whole life, through the Catholic Church.
To that must be added charity and good works, without which, faith is altogether useless. Charity and good works feed our own faith as well as the faith of others, and paves the way for the increase of sanctifying grace in our soul, which is what we must have to remain faithful, which will make us holy, which is a requirement for salvation.
That's the bottom line, in a nutshell.
-
I must admit, Cassini, that I have never heard of “absolute truth”.
I read the article you linked to and saw nothing there to give me an idea of what it is.
Can you help me with that please?