Fundamentalism

 

TRAJECTORIES OF FUNDAMENTALISM

 

1 Introduction

          This paper is a moderate but concentrated attempt to explore, to some extent, the trajectories of fundamentalism. The expression trajectories is used to underline its curved, often unclear passage. It starts with the origin of the movement and proceeds to examine the possibilities of using the term in contexts different from the original. The other discussions are about the theological background of the movement, religious fundamentalism- Sikh, Hindu, Islamic; Indian fundamentalism, general reasons for the emergence of fundamentalism, some common characteristics of fundamentalism and concluding points.

 

2 Protestant Origins

Fundamentalism was a post-enlightenment phenomenon originated in the United States, in the late 1800’s. It was a religious movement within various Protestant bodies to counter the theory of biological evolution, the development of biblical criticism,  antisupernaturalism (against miracles), secularization of American society and the modernism of the late nineteenth century. The Baptist Curtis L. Laws, originally coined the word in 1920 to refer to a set of 12 booklets (tracts) of essays entitled, Fundamentals: A Testimony of Truth that appeared between 1910 and 1915 in response to these intellectual developments.[1]

 The term ‘fundamentalist’ originally referred to Christians who followed tenets, or ‘fundamentals’, of Christian faith as laid down principally in these pamphlets. They believed that these fundamentals are ‘divinely sanctioned beliefs’ and therefore, ‘sought both to identify and to exclude those who did not share those beliefs’.[2]

Subsequently, a series of Bible Conferences of Conservative Protestants was held throughout the United States. The Niagara Conference in 1895 issued a statement of belief which was later called “The five points of fundamentalism”.[3] The World’s Christian Fundamentals Association was founded in 1919 to organize rallies and spread much of its literature throughout the country.

 Fundamentalists were now being asked to do “battle royal for the Fundamentals,” which were chiefly doctrinal.[4]  The risk is that considering a set of beliefs or practices as essential is to reduce the importance of other elements which were once an organic whole.

From the 1920’s to the beginning of the Second World War, nearly all protestant churches in the United States were divided into fundamentalists and modernist groups. This ‘polarization between Liberals and Conservatives gave birth to the Fundamentalist Movement’.[5]

The word fundamentalism began not as a term of abuse or negative connotation. Hence it is also suggested that “it is a term of abuse leveled by liberals and Enlightenment rationalists against any group, religious or otherwise, that dares to challenge the absolutism of the post-Enlightenment outlook.”[6] There are some elements of truth in this statement.

Today the word is used to define variety of movements- religious, social, political, cultural, national, ethnic which aim to impose specific traditions on societies thought to be in danger of straying from the fundamentals that hold them together.

 

3 Scope of the Word

An inadequate yet significant question is “whether this term that was first developed to characterize an American Protestant movement can also be used to explain religious movements in other faiths or in other parts of the world.”[7]  Majority of the answers suggest the applications or meanings attached to words cannot be confined to the context in which they originate.

Bruce Lawrence believes that ‘fundamentalism is a multifocal phenomenon’ and therefore can be extended beyond its original Protestant matrix’. The far-reaching consequences of the scientific revolution that flowed from the Enlightenment, has reached every corner of the planet. In reality, “a fundamentalist worldview is found in movements within almost all religions.”[8] That makes the study of the subject a serious mater.

 

4 Theological Motives

The Stewart brothers believed that the end times prophecies contained in the books of Ezekiel, Daniel, and the Revelation ‘refer to real (not symbolic) events that will soon take place on the plane of human history’. They, also, ‘argued that since many Old Testament prophecies about the coming of Messiah were fulfilled with the coming of Christ as documented in the New Testament, other predictions, concerning the end times, will soon come to pass’. Therefore, ‘they saw it as their duty to save as many people as possible before the coming catastrophe’.[9]  According to Harvey Cox,[10] the Christ-is coming-soon eschatology discourages any kind of work for constructive change and it can also produce a kind of overheated fatalism: if the big bang is going to come, then let it happen soon. Cox further points out that the theology of fundamentalism, ‘in addition to its tendencies toward splitting’, ‘led it to a posture of withdrawal and a suspicion of those who try to influence society’.[11]

  In the formative days of fundamentalism “theological motives were complemented by business competition.”[12] Lyman’s principal agenda in the oil business was fighting his rival John D. Rockefeller’s attempts to monopolize the industry. Further, the American fundamentalists rather than forming a religious party aimed at taking over the government, lobby for power and influence within the Republican Party. Even to gather political strength for matters close to their heart, the fundamentalists collaborate with other conservative groups. In the process they suppress or even abandon some of their theological objections to those groups (Mormons, Jews, or Catholics).

This helps understand religious fundamentalism and its internal contradictions in different religions.

 

5 Religious Fundamentalism

           In the words of Samartha, “religious fundamentalism is an attempt on the part of a community to defend the fundamentals of its faith against all dangers that threaten its identity and survival.”[13] It is also ‘religion inspired political activism’[14] which is against

liberalism, pluralism and freedom and often takes the form of violence.

The militant Sikh movement (Dharam Yudh Morcha) led by the charismatic preacher Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale (1947-84) fits the pattern of movements in other religious traditions that have turned to, or ended in, violence. The expression “Islamic fundamentalism” and “Hindu fundamentalism” have attained significance in contemporary discussions, after the Iranian Revolution of 1978-79, and the demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992 in India. The terror attack on September 11, 2001 (9/11) made more and more people to take fundamentalism seriously.

 

5.1 Sikh Fundamentalism

In the recent past, religious fundamentalism came to the fore in India from the fundamentalist, or rather religious nationalist, movement of Bhindranwale who led a militant Sikh movement. He called for a return to the original teaching of the ten gurus and paid more attention to politics and social behavior of the Sikhs.

Bhindranwale strongly resisted the risk of Sikhism being reabsorbed into the Hindu mainstream from which it originally sprang. In defending his community against the perceived cultural encroachments of Hindu Punjabis, he unleashed a campaign of terror that cost hundreds of innocent Hindu lives. In 1983, fearing arrest Bhindranwale and his armed supporters took shelter in the compound surrounding the Golden Temple at Amritsar. They used the pilgrims and others as human shields. In fact it was an act of desecrating the sacred place.

After the “Operation Blue Star” in June 1984 and the murder of Prime Minister Indra Gandhi, nearly 3,000 Sikhs lost their lives in the ensuing rioting in Delhi and other cities. It is also suspected that “in a retaliatory attack, Sikh terrorists may have been responsible for the crash of an Air India jumbo jet off the Irish coast in June 1985, killing all 329 people on board.”[15]

The ensuing anti-Sikh atrocities ignited a new wave of Sikh fundamentalism that raged for another decade. Now it is clear that fundamentalism has strayed far beyond the original intentions.

 

5.2 Hindu fundamentalism

It is generally argued that if fundamentalism is defending the fundamentals of a religion, doctrine or ideology then this term seems not appropriate to the Indian context, especially to Hinduism because “unlike Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, Hinduism does not have a normative collection of holy writings or a systematic outline of religious teachings accepted by all adherents.”[16] The original intent and the current intricacies of the usage of the term fundamentalism defeat this argument.

          Dayananda’s Arya Samaj (1875) sowed the seeds of Hindu fundamentalism, first in the Punjab region and then to other parts of India. Punjabi leaders of the Arya Samaj founded the Punjab Hindu Provincial Sabha (council), the first politically oriented Hindu group, in 1909.  The Sabha became All India Hindu Mahasabha (great council), in 1921. The council actively fostered the growth of RSS and it’s off shoots.

  In fact, “Dayananda wanted to purify Hinduism of what he regarded as later additions by returning to the Vedas as the basic source of religious authority.”[17] He believed that the Vedas were the highest revelations ever given to humanity, and contained all knowledge, scientific as well as spiritual. Therefore, all references to kings and battles in the Vedas are in fact political or military directives.

In contrast to Dayananda, Hedgewar, the founder of RSS made the warrior (Kshatriya) ideal contained in the Ramayana central to this program.[18] M.S. Golwalkar, ‘expressed his admiration for the Nazis in Germany, who held similar ideas about national purity’.[19]

Selectivity is a trait of fundamentalism. RSS, adopted the style of the Boy Scout Movement and Young Men’s Christian Association (YMCA) that stressed the importance of physical activity with paramilitary overtones. Even the khaki shorts worn by RSS volunteers during their drills were modeled on the uniform of the British Indian police. In fact, RSS consciously blends indigenous ideas of spiritual leadership with organizational techniques borrowed from the West.

Demolition of Babri Masjid in 1992 was the culmination of Hindu fundamentalism. The “television serials like Ramayana and Mahabharata contributed to the awakening of the sentiments of the Hindu masses towards fundamentalism and militancy is everybody’s knowledge.”[20] The demolition of the mosque that is an act of sacrilege and  tearing down one religion for another marked a dangerous new phase in Indian politics. Again, the 2002 Gujarat riots unmasked the face of Hindu fundamentalism. ‘Yet the Muslim has been portrayed as the enemy within’[21] and alienation has ignited extremism.

          Now, BJP’s efforts to ‘hinuvize the culture of India by making changes in the educational system’, increase of violence against minorities[22] are well in the direction of Fundamentalism. Similarly Hindutva too is a mixture of theology (Ramology) and ideology which is constantly being reconstructed and reinterpreted to serve political purpose. The predominant tone of Dayananda’s myth of the golden age of Aryavartic kings is nationalist like that of Rama’s rule in Ayodhya.

         

5.2.1 Reasons for Hindu Fundamentalism

One reason may be that ‘the secular state’ has failed to be secular and it becomes easy for Hindus ‘to legitimatize fundamentalism and to seek political power to redress, on their own, what they perceive to be wrongs done to the majority community, while favouring minority communities’. Another reason is ‘the unwillingness of the Secular Left to recognize the importance of religion in public life, and its inability to provide a credible alternative to religion’. Still further several years after ‘independence, almost every area of India’s national life- political, economic, social, religious and cultural – is dominated by values and structures from outside’.[23]

Even though, these arguments can be refuted, the majority perception is that when, national identity and dignity, the nation’s heritage and cultural values, are presented to be in danger, religious fundamentalism rise as a protest and defense. 

 

5.3 Islamic Fundamentalism

The formative institutions of Islam were created during a period of historic triumph. ‘Non-Muslims were tolerated on condition that they accepted their subordinate status’. During the colonial and post-colonial period, most of the Islamic world came under Western political, cultural, and commercial domination.

This prompted Muslim reformers such as Sayyid Ahmed Khan to ally themselves to European power in order to try to accommodate the scientific and humanistic knowledge of the West within the cultural norms of Islam. The result was the separation of religious and secular culture contrary to the stated Islamic tradition, which denied any formal distinction between religion and the world.

While Modernization (including political modernization) proceeded along the secular path, religion remained for the most part in the custody of traditionalist ulama who avoided the challenge of modernizing the religion from within.

H. R. Gibb, the well known orientlist, used the word fundamentalism in his book Mohammedanism (later retitled Islam) with reference to Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (Iranian origin), the pan-Islamic reformer and political activist. He was the founder of the ‘revivalist movement’, which later gave rise to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Ibn Saud was an Arab tribal, political, and religious leader who founded Saudi Arabia.

The movements of Ibn Saud and Afghani involved a radical, in some cases and armed, defense of a religious tradition that felt itself to be challenged or threatened by modernity. Ibn Saud’s warriors sought to return to the 7^th –century scriptural roots of Islam, unsupplemented by the accumulated customs, doctrines, and traditions of subsequent centuries.

Afghani, wanted to return to Islam’s pristine roots. He galvanized the Muslim rulers of his day into combating British imperialism. His attitude to modernity was thoroughly ambiguous. While he hated imperialism, acknowledged the need for whole-scale reforms of the Muslim religion, which he saw as decadent, decayed and corrupt.[24] His spirit is much closer to that of Martin Luther than to, say, a contemporary scriptural literalsit such as Jerry Falwell. Most Islamists recalled the age of the Rightly Guided Caliphs as an era of justice and prosperity.

The Muslim Brotherhood founded by Hasan al-Banna, in British – dominated Egypt in 1928, like RSS adopted the style of the Boy Scout Movement and Young Men’s Christian Association (YMCA) which stressed the importance of physical activity with paramilitary overtones. The Brotherhood consciously blend elements of modernity with aspects of tradition.

Unlike in other religious traditions, in the majority Sunni tradition fundamentalism is driven mainly by the secular elites, beneficiaries of modern scientific and technical educations. They wished to reintegrate the religious, cultural, and political life of their societies along Islamic lines, the ‘restoration of the Shariah’ (Islamic Law). The underlying tone is to bring in the idea of a political order governed by God. This is the   ‘particular Islamic response to the loss of cultural hegemony’.[25]

Therefore the main concern of most Muslim fundamentalists is the removal of governments deemed corrupt or too pro-western and the replacement of laws imported from the West by the indigenous Sharia code derived from the Koran and the sunna (custom) of the Prophet Muhammad.

 It is interesting that higher criticism of Koran, ‘has not been a major issue in the Muslim world to date, though it may become so in due course, as literary-critical theories gain ground in academic circles’.[26] This is another example for the complexity of fundamentalism. The discussions on religious fundamentalism help a meaningful analysis of Indian fundamentalism.

  

6 Indian Fundamentalism

India suffered centuries of conquest by various Islamic dynasties and colonial rule- British, French, Dutch and Portuguese. Besides, the partition of India by the British and the alienation of minorities within post-Independence India sowed the seeds for sectarian divide. Although Hindus are majority, they have a ‘scarred Hindu consciousness’ that during centuries of foreign rule they suffered persecution.

Therefore, “India’s fundamentalists were radicalized by anger over the past and fear for the future.”[27] Still there is ‘fear of marginalization, fear of persecution and fear of ‘the other’. In fact the “fear of Hindu hegemony has radicalized extremists within all of India’s religious minorities, whether Christian, Muslim or Sikh.”[28]

The Hindu nationalists, “whose original ideology took inspiration from Nazi doctrine, has succeeded in defining the political debate of the times: what it is to be Indian.”[29] For them the creation of Pakistan was yet another Muslim design to diminish Hindustan. Partition fired a desire to wrest back ‘stolen’ territory and recreate an imagined Hindu Raj. It spawned suspicion of the millions of Muslims who remained in India and whose loyalty to the country is perpetually on trial.[30] Confrontation with Pakistan is so often presented as a confrontation with Islam. Or Pakistan is equated with Muslims.

Further, fundamentalism in India is not so much to protect the purity of religious faith; it is ‘the use of religion for mobilizing the community to further consolidate its political influence’.[31] In reality, “the revivalist political thrust was to gain political control rather than reorganize the social and economic order.”[32]

The Hindu nationalists ‘reduced the issue of national identity to a misinterpreted set of cultural norms’.[33] As a result, “today, religious fundamentalism in India manifests itself in the form of Cultural Nationalism.”[34]

          Edna Fernandes writes, “In Kashmir, Nagaland, Assam and Punjab, insurgencies reared like monsters from the desolate landscape of economic stagnation. The terrorists were the biggest recruiters in town.  Militancy was a job. With a religious ideology attached, it became a mission.”[35]

          The analysis of Indian fundamentalism necessitates locating the general reasons for the fast growth of fundamentalism.

 

7 Reasons for the Surge of Fundamentalism

One of the reasons is the failure of traditional religions to encompass modernity. Modernity challenged almost all firm convictions that people held for the past many centuries. As a result ‘the basic meaning of life for many people has been shattered’.[36] In this context, Fundamentalism makes s a radical demand for meaning in our pluralistic world.

Secondly, all religion and culture are exposed to a process of globalization and secularization.  Fundamentalism is a radical reaction to this process

Third, religious pluralism is a feature of modernity. It calls for choice. Fundamentalism is a response to the issue of differences and choices.

Fourth, there is a fear among fundamentalists that their religious identity is being threatened by contemporary culture. Dictators and political leaders use this opportunity to increase their hold on the people by pandering to their religious sentiments’. In a way “they become promoters of religious fundamentalism by encouraging and abetting religious extremists.”[37]

Fifth, after the World War II, faith in secular eschatologies and the hope for a betterment and development of this world has been shattered. In the face of social instability, cultural transformations, demographic dislocations, and sweeping changes which are so obvious in the modern world, a large segment of the human population is bound to suffer from enormous insecurity. At this juncture, many turn to the absolute security of a divine world presented by the fundamentalists.

Sixth, ‘fundamentalism is most rampant among the poor, in depressed areas, and among those who have seen nearly every facet of life change and who find themselves struggling to find a stable footing in life’. It is also found among ‘populations of poor immigrants and ‘among those who find themselves suddenly out of work and who watch their savings daily erode’. “Even among the wealthy and middle class, fundamentalism can provide a buttress against changes which threaten their way of life, privilege, and status.”[38]

In general, fundamentalism used the technic of crisis-consciousness of people[39] - military crisis, economic crisis, political crisis and moral crisis for mobilization and politicization.  This was common among the speeches of Jery Falwell.

          Having identified the reasons for the surge of fundamentalism, it is appropriate to underline some of the common characteristics of fundamentalism.

 

8 Characteristics of Fundamentalism (Family Resemblances)

The fundamentalist movements in different religions and in different part of the world are not identical, but all of them exhibit what the philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein called certain ‘family resemblance’.[40] They are:

 

8.1 Golden Age

Most fundamentalism movements envision a golden age where the problems and conflicts of their time were un-prevalent. For the American fundamentalists this period was just after the American victory in the Second World War. Some time they also look back to the time or origin that is the American Revolution ‘whose founding fathers are deemed to have been God-fearing Christians’.

Muslims fundamentalists look back to the mythical idea of a time when there was   no drug and alcohol abuse, unregulated sexuality, criminal behavior, and child abuse.  For them this was the era of the Prophet Muhammad and his immediate successors, the Rightly Guided Caliphs. Often this period is extended to the pre-colonial days.

           Dayananda wanted to bring back the kingdom of Aryans while the majority Hindus wishes to restore the rule of Lord Rama. Even the BJP government often speaks of restoring or going back to the Vedic age.

Some Jewish fundamentalists hark back to the era of David and Solomon. The advancement of the present world suggests the impossibility of the existence of a golden age and therefore it is implausible. Are many of our thoughts and researches like this?

 

8.2 Religious Pluralism

Fundamentalists do not or cannot fully accept the modern reality of religious pluralism.

Islamist extremists in Upper Egypt have tried to extract the jizya tax from the Christian Coptic minority. This tax payment symbolizes the inferior status of others. The effort to curtail religious freedom in India is the paradigm of Hindu fundamentalists. They exclude the non-Hindu religious communities from there consideration of religion.

Paradoxically fundamentalists who want to pursue a political agenda have found it expedient to collaborate with groups they regard as heretical. It is a fact that in a globalized culture ‘denial of pluralism is a recipe for conflict’.[41] Managing religious pluralism is essential for a peaceful coexistence.

 

8.3 Literalism

Literalism means that the letter or exact wording of a text carries the whole weight of its meaning. It is reading the text at its plainest, most obvious. Fundamentalists resist historical critical method.

Therefore, ‘fundamentalists everywhere tend towards a literalist interpretation of the texts they revere’. It assumes that words can be understood separately from the hearer or reader’s presuppositions about their context, meaning, or intent. The adverse effect of this principle is that, it leads to inerrancy of the scripture.[42]

Muslims ‘take the Koran to be the literal Word of God’. Higher criticism of the Koran is still very largely confined to scholars who are not Muslims.  More than literalism and inerrancy the real family resemblance is found on their hermeneutic style. This style can be described as ‘factualist or historicist’.[43] Denying symbolic interpretations, at least in some cases releases the violence contained in the text.

 

8.4 Integralism

The Catholic equivalent of fundamentalism is integralism. It is ‘a literal, ahistorical, and nonhermeneutical reading of papal pronouncements’. It emphasizes the integrity, or divine quality, of religious leadership (in any tradition).

Loyalism directed towards an institution or person stands in marked contrast to the forms that fundamentalism takes in the scripturally oriented versions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, where adherence to the text ‘supersedes traditional forms of authority’.[44]

          The fundamentalists/integralists ‘were caught up in a ‘battle royal’ against their more liberal co-religionists.

 

8.5 Myths

There is the risk of treating ‘scripture (myths), as manuals for practical action, as distinct from sources of personal inspiration or moral guidance’. ‘Majority of Islamist activists, including the civil engineer Osama Bin Laden and the architect Mohamed Atta(Egypt), are drawn not from people trained in theology or religious studies, but from the ranks of graduates in modern faculties’.         Sayyid Qutb, the Islamist ideologue who shaped the thinking of Osama Bin Laden and most of today’s Islamist groups urged his followers to approach the Koran as a manual for action.

A similar case is among the Jewish extremists. For fundamentalist militants such as Rabbi Yisrael Hess, formerly the campus rabbi of Tel Aviv’s Bar-Ilan University, the Amalekites of scripture are assimilated to contemporary Palestinian Arabs. He wrote “the day will yet come when we will all be called to fulfill the commandment of the divinely ordained war to destroy Amalek.’ It is nothing but history on to reverse.

For many Christian fundamentalists, the return of Christ will be preceded by the war against Antichrist and the Days of Tribulations. The risk is that humans become its self-appointed instruments.[45]

In the Baghavad Gita, the god ‘Krishna tells the warrior Arjuna that he must submit to his destiny in fighting against his own kinsmen’.[46] Taking myths as real acts to be performed again can be a grave danger.

 

8.6 Humans take the Place of God

 Often, ‘fundamentalism is associated with an authoritarian personality structure’.[47] ‘For fundamentalist action involves, almost by definition, the appropriation of the divine will. As a defender of God, the fundamentalist militant claims the right to act on his behalf’. This paradoxically affirms the supremacy of the human will. It is confusing God with their own will-to-power.  

That is why in most cases ‘fundamentalists are militant’.[48]  They justify violence, of course not in all cases.

 

8.7 Sacred History

According to James Davidson Hunter, a Sociologist from the University of Virginia, fundamentalism ‘seeks to reinstate a course of sacred history that modernity has derailed, that ties religious ideology to national identity, that wields a sacred text as authority for rejecting error, and that effectively organize popular anger’.[49] Connected with this is ‘a keen search for a new identity’.[50] In the process, fundamentalism generally responds negatively to social and political developments, and refuses to pay attention to the context. Hence they ‘are generally against social and political movements for justice and peace’.[51]

In the words of American Sociologist Nancy Ammermann fundamentalism exists ‘where there is a conscious opposition against forces of change; and conscious opposition is possible only where there is change’.[52] This is very obvious in our context.

 

8.9 Theology, Subculture and Ideology

Harvey Cox considers that fundamentalism is a theology, subculture and ideology.  It is theology as it wages battle royal for its doctrines and interpretations. As a subculture, ‘fundamentalism challenges the dominant culture’. And as an ideology, ‘It interprets and defends the perceived life interests of an identifiable social group’. Falwell and Hindson called fundamentalism ‘redneck religion’. He writes, “They want not only to “keep the faith” but to change the world so the faith can be kept more easily.”[53] Cox’s insights are helpful for a critical analysis of fundamentalism of any kind.

 

8.10 A Paradox

The paradox of fundamentalism is ‘its recent romance with the electronic media’.[54] Religious television moves toward entertainment. “Pat Robertson uses a setting copied from late-night talk shows. A succession of splendidly dressed guests tell the audience how the Lord has brought them success, health, money, power. The Gospel is reduced to a means of achieving the same modern secular goals the evangelist began by opposing.”[55]

People love face to face contact but “by buying into the mass-media world so heavily fundamentalism may have unintentionally sold out to one of the most characteristic features of the very modern world it wants so much to challenge.”[56] Although mass media is helpful in many ways, today it has become handy to groups including fundamentalists/terrorists so easily to broadcast their ideas.

 

 

 

8.11 Fundamentalism is not Tradition

Tradition is simply what occurs unselfconsciously as part of the natural order of things, an unreflective or unconsidered Weltanschauung (world view). Fundamentalists are different from the traditionalists ‘in the way they interpret the texts they select than is often supposed’. Therefore, ‘fundamentalism may be defined as tradition made self-aware and consequently defensive’.[57] Hence, traditionalism is not fundamentalism, but a necessary correlate to it.

Unlike the traditionalists, “fundamentalists favor conspiracy theories. They impute the moral decay and ethical flabbiness of the modern world to the conniving of secular humanists, which have seized power in the universities, the schools, the media, and even the churches. The fundamentalists are angry and ready to fight back.”[58]  

Similarly, fundamentalism is different from cults or New Religious Movements (Rajneesh) because of its commitment to textual scripturalism.

 

9 Conclusions

The trajectory of fundamentalism is apparent from its origin where the original sponsors had overarched business interests besides their concern for the fundamentals, as they viewed, of Christianity. And it is real in our own times and context.

There is no convincing or comprehensive definition of fundamentalism. It has strayed into every religion, culture, political groups, etc. Therefore, it is found among groups everywhere.  

A fundamentalist mindset is not intrinsically harmful, but when it spreads its tentacles across the spectrum with a hidden and vengeful agenda.  

The conventional wisdom that politics was breaking away from religion as societies became more industrialized, religious belief and practice would be restricted to private thought and activities are dented. Contrarily, religious activism was very far from being over. Newly politicized movements are occurring in virtually every major religious tradition. The contemporary society is experiencing a global resurgence in religion.

          Fundamentalists are obsessed with the drawing of boundaries that will set the group apart from the wider society by deliberately choosing beliefs or modes of behavior which proclaim who they are and how they would like to be seen.

An oppressive form of fundamentalism is currently on the rise, moving toward totalitarianism. Here adherents insist that everyone must agree with them, otherwise sanctions of varying severity.  

The fundamentalists’ opposition to modernity and their use of reason are selective. They do not shy away from using the technological tools of the modern world. While they are critical of science they capitalize on what is advantageous to them.  Often the rise in religious militancy in opposition to the secularization thesis is attributed to the increasing power and accessibility of audiovisual media. It works both ways.

Similarly their creative use of reason is illustrated in their interpretations, including of scripture. The same is true to their political alliances.

Fundamentalism constantly fights against contemporary culture without trying to understand it in light of faith.

They are ahistorical, because, they oppose and even ignore the irreducible process of secularization and simultaneously the irreducibility of history.

In the study of fundamentalism one has to make a distinction between feelings about religion and intellectual understanding of it.

Ours is a pluralistic society. We need to accept plurality-religion, language, culture etc. We have therefore to resist against all divisive fundamentalistic forces, which threaten our just and peaceful co-existence.

The climax and worrying attitude of fundamentalism is that its tentacles stretch to nationalism, language, culture, religion, education, food, business etc.

As Indian secularism claims to be neutral to all religions, as against Western which is indifferent to religion, it has to be upheld. Sacralising a nation is the most threatening aspect of fundamentalism today.

We need leaders who understand the formidable challenges of economic and social change ahead, not leaders purely seeking to avenge the religious wrongs of the past.

          By now all of us know what is fundamentalism in our own settings- theology, culture, etc. If we can cease ourselves from it, we can think of opposing it using the same process that we used to analyze ourselves.

---

[1] Malise Ruthven, Fundamentalism: A Very Short Introduction (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007), 7. (In 1910 Milton and Lyman Stewart, two devout Christian brothers who had made their fortune in the California oil business, embarked on a five-year programme of sponsorship for a series of pamphlets...Entitled The Fundamentals: A Testimony of Truth, the tracts, written by a number of leading conservative American and British theologians.)

[2] Santosh C. Saha and Thomas K. Carr, eds., Religious Fundamentalism in Developing Countries (London: Greenwood Press, 2001), 1.

[3]Ruth Tiffany Barnhouse, “Fundamentalism as a Way of Seeing the World,” Anglican Theological Review Lxxv/4 (Fall, 1993): 509.(These five points were the verbal inerrancy of Scripture, the divinity of Jesus Christ, the Virgin Birth, the substitutionary theory of the Atonement, and the physical resurrection and bodily return of Christ.)

[4] S.M. Michael, “Socio-Political Analysis of the Rise of Fundamentalism,” in Intercultural Mission, vol.2,

edited by Lazar T. Stanislaus and Martin Ueffing (Delhi: ISPCK, 2015), 17.

[5] George Ninan, “An Attempt to Define Secularism and Fundamentalism in the Indian Context,” in Fundamentalism and Secularism: The Indian Predicament, edited by Andreas Nehring (Madras: Gurukul, 1999), 48.

[6] Malise Ruthven, Fundamentalism: A Very Short Introduction, 5.

[7] Rebecca Joyce Frey, Fundamentalism (New Delhi: Viva Books, 2010), 35.

[8] Marcel J. Dumestre, “Postfundamentalism and the Christian Institutional Learning Community,” Religious Education 90/2 (Spring, 1995): 194.

[9] Malise Ruthven, Fundamentalism: A Very Short Introduction, 7-8.

[10] Harvey Cox, Religion in the Secular City: Towards a Postmodern Theology (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1984), 65.

[11] Harvey Cox, Religion in the Secular City: Towards a Postmodern Theology, 45.

[12] Malise Ruthven, Fundamentalism: A Very Short Introduction, 8.

[13]Stanley J. Samartha, “The Causes and Consequences of Religious Fundamentalism,” in

Fundamentalism and Secularism: The Indian Predicament, edited by Andreas Nehring (Madras: Gurukul, 1999), 30.

[14] Jacob Peenikaparambil, “Fundamentalism,” Indian Currents xxxii/46 (9-15 November, 2020): 24.

[15] Malise Ruthven, Fundamentalism: A Very Short Introduction, 111.

[16] Rebecca Joyce Frey, Fundamentalism (New Delhi: Viva Books, 2010), 101.

[17] Rebecca Joyce Frey, Fundamentalism (New Delhi: Viva Books, 2010), 104.

[18] Rebecca Joyce Frey, Fundamentalism (New Delhi: Viva Books, 2010), 105.

[19] Malise Ruthven, Fundamentalism: A Very Short Introduction, 107.

[20] J Kuruvachira, Roots of Hindutva: A critical Study of Hindu Fundamentalism and Nationalism (Delhi: Media House, 2005), 47.

[21] Edna Fernandes, Holy Warriors: A Journey into the Heart of Indian Fundamentalism (London: Portobello Books Ltd, 2008), xx.

[22] S.M. Michael, “Socio-Political Analysis of the Rise of Fundamentalism,” in Intercultural Mission, vol.2,

edited by Lazar T. Stanislaus and Martin Ueffing (Delhi: ISPCK, 2015), 19.

[23] Stanley J. Samartha, “The Causes and Consequences of Religious Fundamentalism,” in

Fundamentalism and Secularism: The Indian Predicament, edited by Andreas Nehring (Madras: Gurukul, 1999), 33-36.

[24] Malise Ruthven, Fundamentalism: A Very Short Introduction, 20.

[25] Malise Ruthven, Fundamentalism: A Very Short Introduction, 26-28.

[26] Malise Ruthven, Fundamentalism: A Very Short Introduction, 4.

[27] Edna Fernandes, Holy Warriors: A Journey into the Heart of Indian Fundamentalism, xviii.

[28] Edna Fernandes, Holy Warriors: A Journey into the Heart of Indian Fundamentalism, xxii.

[29] Edna Fernandes, Holy Warriors: A Journey into the Heart of Indian Fundamentalism, xxiii.

[30] Edna Fernandes, Holy Warriors: A Journey into the Heart of Indian Fundamentalism, xix.

[31] George Ninan, “Social and Political Reasons for the Growth of Fundamentalism in India,” in Fundamentalism and Secularism: The Indian Predicament, edited by Andreas Nehring (Madras: Gurukul, 1999), 69.

[32] Santosh C. Saha and Thomas K. Carr, eds., Religious Fundamentalism in Developing Countries (London: Greenwood Press, 2001), 109.

[33] Santosh C. Saha and Thomas K. Carr, eds., Religious Fundamentalism in Developing Countries (London: Greenwood Press, 2001), 91.

[34] S.M. Michael, “Socio-Political Analysis of the Rise of Fundamentalism,” in Intercultural Mission, vol.2,

edited by Lazar T. Stanislaus and Martin Ueffing (Delhi: ISPCK, 2015), 34.

[35] Edna Fernandes, Holy Warriors: A Journey into the Heart of Indian Fundamentalism , xxiv.

[36] Andreas Nehring , “Fundamentalism – A Radical Response to Postmodern Secularism,” in

Fundamentalism and Secularism: The Indian Predicament, edited by Andreas Nehring ( Madras: Gurukul,1999), 25.

[37] Jacob Peenikaparambil, “Fundamentalism,” Indian Currents xxxii/46 (9-15 November, 2020): 24.

[38] Eugene La Verdiers, “Fundamentalism: A Pastoral concern,” Bible Today 21/1 (January, 1983): 8-9.

[39] Gnana Robinson, “Why is Fundamentalism a Problem Today? ,” in Fundamentalism and Secularism: The Indian Predicament, edited by Andreas Nehring ( Madras: Gurukul,1999), 11-12.

[40] Malise Ruthven, Fundamentalism: A Very Short Introduction, 6.

[41] Malise Ruthven, Fundamentalism: A Very Short Introduction, 31-32.

[42] Malise Ruthven, Fundamentalism: A Very Short Introduction, 43-44.

[43] Malise Ruthven, Fundamentalism: A Very Short Introduction, 40-52.

[44] Malise Ruthven, Fundamentalism: A Very Short Introduction, 46.

[45] Malise Ruthven, Fundamentalism: A Very Short Introduction, 54-57.

[46] Malise Ruthven, Fundamentalism: A Very Short Introduction, 119.

[47] Rebecca Joyce Frey, Fundamentalism (New Delhi: Viva Books, 2010), 6-8.

[48] Rebecca Joyce Frey, Fundamentalism (New Delhi: Viva Books, 2010), 6-8.

[49] Gnana Robinson, “Why is Fundamentalism a Problem Today?,” in Fundamentalism and Secularism: The Indian Predicament, edited by Andreas Nehring ( Madras: Gurukul,1999), 13.

[50] Andreas Nehring , “Fundamentalism – A Radical Response to Postmodern Secularism,” in

Fundamentalism and Secularism: The Indian Predicament, edited by Andreas Nehring ( Madras: Gurukul,1999), 19-20.

[51] George Ninan, “An Attempt to Define Secularism and Fundamentalism in the Indian Context,” in Fundamentalism and Secularism: The Indian Predicament, edited by Andreas Nehring (Madras: Gurukul, 1999), 48.

[52] Andreas Nehring , “Fundamentalism – A Radical Response to Postmodern Secularism,” in

Fundamentalism and Secularism: The Indian Predicament, edited by Andreas Nehring ( Madras: Gurukul,1999), 18.

[53] Harvey Cox, Religion in the Secular City: Towards a Postmodern Theology, 56-61.

[54] Harvey Cox, Religion in the Secular City: Towards a Postmodern Theology, 67.

[55] Harvey Cox, Religion in the Secular City: Towards a Postmodern Theology, 69.

[56] Harvey Cox, Religion in the Secular City: Towards a Postmodern Theology, 70.

[57] Malise Ruthven, Fundamentalism: A Very Short Introduction, 9-11.

[58] Harvey Cox, Religion in the Secular City: Towards a Postmodern Theology (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1984), 41.