ChrisPoe: I would love to hear you rant more about Indy Fundies. How do the Sovereign Grace Baptists fit into this Indy Fundy disaster? What can be done for folks like me who are neck deep in Undy Fundy churches?
-----Added 3/10/2009 at 12:07:46 EST-----
Oops, I meant Indy Fundies...but it is funny so I will leave it as is...LOL.
Pergy,
I've been giving the issue of fundamentalism some thought. Here are some of my thoughts, although I don't know how pertinent they really are to your question.
There are others here who can give you better information who have been on the "inside" of the fundamentalist movement. I believe Ruben has a fundamentalist background as do several others here. I've only encountered it on the internet.
At this point I view it as largely a Northern movement (which I think was George Marsden's thesis) with regard to organization, etc. Of course BJU and PCC and some other schools in the South would be an exception. But I say Northern because the problems in the Northern mainline churches in the early 20th century were much more pronounced than in the South, and so a lot more "fundamentalists" came out at that time, whereas conservatives tended to stay in the PCUS and SBC, although exceptions like J. Frank Norris could certainly be named.
I am actually not opposed to fundamentalism in principle. Early on Machen was considered a fundamentalist and men like Warfield had work published in the Fundamentals series. It basically meant standing up for the authority of the Bible against modernism, etc. Of course it has now come to mean something else entirely. But I do think the principle of separation from error is sound.
Sovereign Grace Baptists (Pergy and I aren't referring to Mahaney's organization) are separatists too to a large degree as most of them are independent. (Some are SBC but basically in name only, and those are typically cases in which the church isn't as Calvinistic as the pastor.) But they aren't part of the fundy movement. As we will see, the issue of "second degree separation" is where the rubber really meets the road as far as the fundamentalist movement is concerned. A lot of fundamentalists don't seem to be able to conceive of a man or a church that is independent (i.e. not part of their movement) that isn't compromised in some way.
Many Sovereign Grace churches are amil, but some are premil. (Since I am premil, I can't help you with trying to reform the national church unless maybe they've embraced some kind of extreme view or give the subject too much emphasis, as many of course do.)
Most here on the board are members of churches that are separatist to some degree, including the PCA, OPC, URCNA, FIRE, ARBCA, etc. The Free Presbyterian church (Paisley) that a few here from time to time have been involved with is basically fundamentalist and has ties with the fundamentalist movement.
However, the indy fundy movement has been dominated by a bunch of little popes excommunicating each other in newsletters, etc. typically without any due process. They also harp on minor and sometimes questionable issues or things indifferent and typically are
not fundamental enough when it comes to actually defending the fundamentals. Instead, much of the focus is on whether we should separate from Albert Mohler because he isn't separated from Billy Graham (who cooperated with liberals and Rome,) or separate from John MacArthur because he isn't separated from Albert Mohler who isn't separated from Billy Graham. Especially after the split with the "New Evangelicals" in the middle of the 20th Century, serious scholarship for the most part seems to have disappeared from the movement. King James Onlyism of course is prominent among many IFB's as well.
Calvinism is making inroads into some Fundamentalist circles too. I like much of what I see from younger fundamentalists at sites like
Sharper Iron, although I usually only give it the occasional passing glance. But I don't hesitate to say that I have more confidence in some of the "young fundamentalists" (many of whom are imbibing Carson, Piper, Dever, etc.) than I do in the "young evangelicals" who are often on the verge of doctrinal indifference at best, if not outright heresy and apostasy. The chief "heresy" of some of the younger fundys seems to be questioning aspects of the movement itself, such as legalism and maybe questions about separation in some instances.
There are some bright spots among fundamentalist institutions as well, like
Detroit Baptist Seminary and
Central Baptist Seminary, although they are not representative of the movement as a whole. (I'm sure some in the movement probably think they are compromised because they are not KJVO, etc.) I read something from Dr. Kevin Bauder, President of Central Baptist Seminary the other day that basically argued for what amounts to the Regulative Principle of Worship. Although most here will of course disagree with some aspects of their doctrinal position, I've seen some excellent articles in the
Detroit Baptist Seminary journal. I can't swallow their ideas about separation whole, but I do think we ought to give credit where credit is due.
Bob Jones University for the most part seems to have always had an excellent academic reputation and has periodically had Calvinist faculty. It's just that there has always been some...baggage that went along with attending what was once proclaimed to be "The World's Most Unusual University."
There are two lectures by Phil Johnson called "Dead Right" on Fundamentalism from the 2005 and 2006 Shepherd's Conferences that go into the issue in more detail. They are free to download if you are registered with the
Shepherd's Fellowship.
-----Added 3/10/2009 at 01:24:21 EST-----
Could be a name for a whole new line of clothing.
Undy Fundy. Is that a new fundy Mormon sect?
"Got your Fundy Undies on?"
