By: Jerry S. Maneker

“For freedom Christ has set us free.  Stand firm, therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery.”
(Galatians 5:1)

Like many Christians, I have been curious and dismayed about what seems to be the increasing appeal
of fundamentalism and fundamentalist thinking within Christianity.  Actually, “fundamentalism,” rather than
being within the mainstream of orthodox Christianity, may more profitably be seen as a relatively recent
phenomenon that may more profitably be seen to be a sect that has grown out of Christianity, rather than
existing as a movement within the rubric of orthodox Christianity itself. It is, therefore, ironic that many
people have come to equate fundamentalism with Christianity itself, and view Christianity as a legalistic
religion when, in fact, and quite the opposite, it is a call to freedom in Christ, and is a religion of grace,
love, and peace.  

“The term `fundamentalism' has its origin in a series of pamphlets published between 1910 and 1915.
Entitled ‘The Fundamentals: A Testimony to the Truth,’ these booklets were authored by leading
evangelical churchmen and were circulated free of charge among clergymen and seminarians.   …the
liberalizing trends of German biblical criticism and the encroachment of Darwinian theories about the
origin of the universe, prompted a response by conservative churchmen. The result was the pamphlets.
In 1920, a journalist and Baptist layman named Curtis Lee Laws appropriated the term `fundamentalist' as
a designation for those who were ready ‘to do battle royal for the Fundamentals.’"  “The Bible is the
sacred text of the Christian Fundamentalists. Indeed, if there is one single thing which binds
Fundamentalists together, it is their insistence that the Bible is to be understood as literally true. Further,
Fundamentalists see themselves as the guardians of the truth, usually to the exclusion of others'
interpretation of the Bible. Fundamentalism in other faith traditions similarly proclaims guardianship of
truth.”  (

None of us want to have our comfort zones invaded or have our worlds rocked in any way!  Many of us
are relatively uncomfortable with ideas and behaviors that call into question those ideas that we have
come to revere as deeply held truths, particularly when these “deeply held truths,” and various ideas and
behaviors have been given approval by God as asserted by assorted clergy over the last several
decades. Similarly, if any idea or behavior is viewed by fundamentalists as contradicting “God’s Word,” as
they interpret it from the Bible, they feel duty bound to condemn that idea or that behavior and, despite
rhetoric to the contrary, condemn the people holding that idea or who engage in that behavior.

Fundamentalism’s main attraction seems to be its promise of “certainty” in a very uncertain world!  I’m
reminded of what Jesse Jackson said upon the murder of Enos Cosby, Bill Cosby’s son: “We act as if life
is certain and death is uncertain when, in fact, death is certain and life is very uncertain.”  We’re
frightened of this uncertainty and many people are, understandably, attracted to a voice that assures
them that there is a certainty to be had by following the dictates of the Bible, or any other book viewed as
“holy,” as interpreted and espoused by clergy and others who claim a mantle of authority to interpret that

Most people who gravitate to “progressive” and mainline churches are likely to be somewhat more
comfortable coping with ambiguity or, at least, are likely to be more willing to explore the many grey and
multidimensional aspects of life and the spirit than those who attend fundamentalist churches.  Moreover,
they are usually much more likely to see the need to integrate social justice concerns with their
understanding of the Gospel.

The need, sometimes the desperate need, to live in “certainty” drives many to torture logic, and deny
even the most basic axioms of rationality, and assert such fallacies as the earth merely being about ten
thousand years old, the lack of dinosaurs on the earth as the Bible doesn’t mention them, denial of the
possibility of evolution as they (erroneously) think that it contradicts the existence of a Creator, etc.   
Although fundamentalism is attractive to many for malignant reasons, as well as to those with insufficient
intelligence to deal with the many ambiguities of life, many people live in fear, and fundamentalism
promises deliverance from fear by hammering home a view of God, the Bible, the world, and of people
that breeds the illusion of “certainty” in an uncertain world, controlled by a God they have the temerity to
claim they understand.

“We are fearful people….Fear has become an obvious dwelling place, an
acceptable basis on which to make our decisions and plan our lives. Those we fear have a great power
over us. Those who can make us afraid can also make us do what they want us to do.

”People are afraid for many reasons, but I am convinced that the close connection between power and
fear deserves special attention. So much power is wielded by instilling fear in people and keeping them
afraid… As long as we are kept in fear we can be made to act, speak, and even think as slaves…The
agenda of our world – the issues and items that fill newspapers and newscasts – is an agenda of fear and
power. It is amazing, yes frightening, to see how easily that agenda becomes ours.

”But fearful questions never led to love-filled answers; underneath every fearful question many other
fearful questions are hidden…. Fear engenders fear. Fear never gives birth to love. A careful look at the
gospels shows that Jesus seldom accepted the questions posed to him. He exposed them as coming from
the house of fear. ‘Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven? How often must I forgive my brother if
he wrongs me? Is it against the law for a man to divorce his wife on any pretext whatever? What authority
do you have for acting like this? … Are you the king of the Jews? Lord, has the hour come? Are you
going to restore the kingdom to Israel?…’ To none of these questions did Jesus give a direct answer. He
gently put them aside as questions emerging from false worries. They were raised out of concern for
prestige, influence, power, and control. They did not belong to the house of God. Therefore Jesus always
transformed the question by his answer. He made the question new – and only then worthy of his
(Henri Nouwen, Lifesigns: Intimacy, Fecundity, and Ecstasy in Christian Perspective, 16-19).

As Nouwen pointed out, “fear engenders fear.  Fear never gives birth to love.”  Because those who seek
out Fundamentalism are likely to be very fearful people questing the certainty that fundamentalism
promises, and which they perceive it provides, they are not likely be particularly loving people.  

My wife and I spent about fifteen years in fundamentalist churches, for reasons that are best left for
another article.  In any case, we never really understood why most, though by no means all, of the people
there were not particularly loving people.  For example, when they thought I was dying in the hospital from
Pancreatitis, my wife was a wreck and she called a “friend” and “prayer warrior” who was very well
respected in the church we all attended.  My wife asked her to pray for me because I was dying.  This
prayer warrior, who daily read and quoted from the Bible, and who led women’s prayer groups, said, “I
can’t.  I’m too busy now.”  Believe me, if it didn’t happen to us, I’d have trouble believing it myself.   In
another instance, when my wife was diagnosed with cancer not one of her “friends” or acquaintances,
many of whom went to the fundamentalist church we went to, even picked up the phone to call her and
ask her how she was feeling, let alone offer to help her in any way. Even the pastor never called! We
were on our own!  In another fundamentalist church the pastor’s wife told my then sixteen year old
daughter that she was “a tool of Satan” because she listened to rock music.  An acquaintance of mine,
who went to a fundamentalist church, recently told me that the pastor’s wife approached him and said that
she had heard that he was thinking of leaving that church. He replied, “I’m praying about it.”  She replied,
“I suggest you leave now.”

When one is afraid, one usually doesn’t have the psychic energy to empathize with another person,
particularly when it is felt that the other person might conceivably be a “burden” in one way or another.  
Chronic fear, like any other type of neurosis, breeds self-absorption and, therefore, makes it rather
unlikely that that person will seek to help out another person, since virtually all of that person’s psychic
energy is being spent on “keeping it together.”  And, fundamentalism’s success is that is does, in fact,
help those who are fearful of life, of ambiguity, of the unknown, and of the complex multidimensional
aspects of life and of God, “keep it together.”

For many people, fundamentalism is a desperately needed form of psychotherapy!  This fact is not all
bad!  Most of us want safe places, safe havens, in which to rest, even if it means having our complex and
existential problems addressed by a simple Bible verse, or by a rather trite remark such as, “God doesn’t
give us any more than we can handle.”

This illusion of certainty, although it serves a needed psychological and social purpose for many of those
who seek out fundamentalism, has another, much more dangerous, downside.  Fundamentalism, by its
very nature, requires that there be scapegoats!  In the fundamentalist frame of mind, there has to be an
“us,” and for there to be an “us” there has to be a “them.”

The psychological need for certainty morphs over to the social need for bonding with like-minded
believers.  Therefore, it’s “us” against “them!”  Anyone who is viewed as not seeing God, the Bible, or the
world as that person does is viewed as the outsider, the enemy.  In my experience, many people in
fundamentalist churches don’t even see those who go to “progressive” (Seeking to apply biblical
principles, rather than apply every biblical and cultural practice, to contemporary social problems and
issues.) churches as being “Christian.”

Furthermore, those who don’t believe or act in the way that fundamentalists believe is in the will of God,
which is usually consistent with their own prejudices and stated behaviors, is viewed as “the other,” “the
enemy.”  And, to preserve our way of life, and be true to “God’s Word,” as these fundamentalists insist
and perceive it, they come to deny “the other” the dignity and civil rights and civil liberties that they, the
fundamentalists, take for granted are their God-given right to possess.  Clearly, such a mind-set is not
merely putting oneself in a psychological prison, quite contrary to the fact of the Apostle Paul’s assertion
in the Scripture verse that precedes this article, but is ripe for fostering a climate of fascism that pays off
for many politicians and religious leaders who frequently work hand-in-hand with each other for their own
mutual material, financial, and what many perceive to be their own spiritual gain.  

By its very nature, the psychological and social needs of most fundamentalists require that there be a
scapegoat!  There must be some constructed “enemy” against which to rail, so that one’s world-view is
reinforced, and so that in-group solidarity is maintained.  The famous sociologist, Emile Durkheim, gave
us what is probably the closest thing to a law in social life.  He said that when you have a threatening out-
group, the in-group unites to protect itself against it.

Therefore, in order for there to be in-group solidarity, there must be an out-group which must be fought
against.  Even if there is no ready-made out-group(s), the in-group, the fundamentalists in this context,
will actively, perhaps unconsciously, seek to create them until they find one or more that are viewed as
“politically correct,” relatively “safe,” and “appropriate” to persecute.  At one time the group was women;
at another time it was African Americans; now it’s gay people.  Even when it is no longer politically correct
or appropriate to oppress gay people, fundamentalists will tenaciously seek out another out-group, as
fundamentalism requires at least one out-group for it to not only flourish, but to even exist.  In
fundamentalism, there must be an “us,” and there can’t be an “us” without a “them!”

It’s always important to remember that Christians are principally defined by only two characteristics: the
love for God, in that we trust God over and above seen circumstances; loving other people.  One’s
theology is relatively unimportant, in that there can be a wide variety of theologies and Christology among
Christians.  “Love” is what is important in the Christian life but, as shown above, since love can’t be a
priority among those who live in fear and require black and white answers in a very grey world,
fundamentalists emphasize one’s “theology” as being the criterion for membership in the Christian

Christians know the truth that “It is better to be of a lowly spirit among the poor than to divide the spoil
with the proud.” (Proverbs 16:19)  Most fundamentalists can’t psychologically or socially afford to absorb
this central tenet of the Christian life.  They may mouth such shibboleths as, “Hate the sin and love the
sinner,” but the fact is (and, frequently, the consequences of their words and actions are) that they show
themselves to hate those who they view as in any way opposing their views of God and of the world.  
Freedom and humility are antithetical to fundamentalism!  The Gospel of grace, faith, love, peace,
reconciliation, and inclusiveness is antithetical to the arrogance that is part and parcel of
fundamentalism!  “Humility” is inconsistent with the belief that only one’s own views are the right ones, and
all other views are wrong; those who claim divergent views, or engage in behaviors deemed ungodly or
inappropriate by those who claim sole authority in interpreting the Bible and knowing “God’s will” are,
therefore, usually viewed as not “moral” or “Christian,” or “in the will of God.”

Fundamentalist and allied churches meet deeply felt psychological needs of increasing numbers of
people, and provide a safe space for incestuous socialization that reinforces the one-dimensional thinking
and view of the world of many of these people, and provide a measure of comfort for their angst in
wrestling with a world and a with a God none of us can really comprehend.

These churches are currently meeting deeply felt psychological and social needs of people.  At a time of
rapid economic, social, and technological changes, and the consequent fears that they generate,
increasing numbers of people are looking for a measure of “certainty” that fundamentalism promises to

And, many people tenaciously seek to grab on to this “certainty,” despoiling their own potential for
psychological growth, and even and unwittingly do so at the expense of preserving and enriching the very
fabric of civility of their society, even if this “certainty” is ultimately an illusion.

Home Page