Yes, I’m quite familiar with the origins of the fundamentalist movement within late 19th century Presbyterianism. The movement was named after a series of essays entitled “The Fundamentals,” which sought to describe the core teachings that had to be accepted or else you couldn’t be in the club.
And it seems your faith doesn’t match up with the 4th century Nicene Creed, which outlined the faith for the first great ecumenical council of Christian believers under Constantine. It states, after all, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father [and from the Son]. The question of the Spirit’s procession from the Son remained unresolved and is still unsettled within the global Church. From the 4th century on, it’s been referred to as the filioque controversy.
None of this is a problem to me. Personally, I don’t care about whence proceeds the Spirit. I just care about the Spirit’s movement in the world today. My point in mentioning this is that the “fundamentalist” tradition is nowhere near as old and celebrated as you might believe. It has been divisive and harmful from its inception. Whereas the Church could remain intact for seventeen centuries amidst the still unresolved filioque controversy, the fundamentalists have ever sought to divide the Church over countless little particularities (as you’ve seen ANandy do on this page and on others).
I’m very happy to maintain civil dialog with Christians spanning a vast spectrum of beliefs. But I will not tolerate those who choose to exclude others because they happen not to agree with them.
Yes, I’m quite familiar with the origins of the fundamentalist movement within late 19th century Presbyterianism. The movement was named after a series of essays entitled “The Fundamentals,” which sought to describe the core teachings that had to be accepted or else you couldn’t be in the club.
And it seems your faith doesn’t match up with the 4th century Nicene Creed, which outlined the faith for the first great ecumenical council of Christian believers under Constantine. It states, after all, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father [and from the Son]. The question of the Spirit’s procession from the Son remained unresolved and is still unsettled within the global Church. From the 4th century on, it’s been referred to as the filioque controversy.
None of this is a problem to me. Personally, I don’t care about whence proceeds the Spirit. I just care about the Spirit’s movement in the world today. My point in mentioning this is that the “fundamentalist” tradition is nowhere near as old and celebrated as you might believe. It has been divisive and harmful from its inception. Whereas the Church could remain intact for seventeen centuries amidst the still unresolved filioque controversy, the fundamentalists have ever sought to divide the Church over countless little particularities (as you’ve seen ANandy do on this page and on others).
I’m very happy to maintain civil dialog with Christians spanning a vast spectrum of beliefs. But I will not tolerate those who choose to exclude others because they happen not to agree with them.