A previous speaker has suggested that this organization might be described as "Fundamentalists Anonymous." Although this doesn't apply to all of us, it certainly does to me.

Therefore, at least for me, we might pattern our opening ritual accordingly: "My name is Ben, and I'm a fundamentalist."

"Hello, Ben!"

"I have been dry for 2 months, 1 week, and 3 days." Of course, by "dry," I mean it's been that long since I prayed for some divine intervention. Or, since I asked God what his "plan" was for me. Or, since I knew what happens to someone after they die. Or, whatever.

You see, I was raised a fundamentalist/literalist (I use these terms interchangeably), and once that gets into your blood, you must fight it every day for the rest of your life. It is, in fact, as insidious and addictive as I understand alcoholism to be. For example, I carry with me a portable Tinker Toy®/Erector Set® that allows me to rebuild my old three-story universe on a moment's notice, and offer that supreme being in that other world some deal he can't afford to refuse. There is no cure, but there is a means of preventing it from ruining one's life. Its only antidote is Contemporary Theology. (Antidote: that which counteracts the effects of a poison.) For example, now I am haunted by Sřren Kierkegaard's image of me standing on my own shoulders, conscious of myself making my own decisions that affect my life and the lives of others, and there's just no supreme being in that picture. As my daughters and grandchildren repeatedly tell me, "Daddy/Granddaddy, we wish you hadn't ruined it for us. It was so much easier, nicer, and-above all-more comfortable that other way." They confess to "idol envy," especially at funerals: envy of the fundamentalists who have everything nailed down. But, there's really never any going back. Once you see reality, once you reach theological maturity, there's no road back to the naiveté and theological childishness of literalism and fundamentalism.

Also like alcoholism, fundamentalism is not harmless. And that is what I want to talk about today. It clouds the mind, dulls the spirit, and destroys lives. Some of the more obvious ways in which fundamentalism impoverishes life include:

• The Ten Commandments were intended as a brave experiment in social justice: to see what it might mean to take responsibility for one's neighbors. The commandment against stealing was to protect your neighbor's property. The commandment against killing was to protect your neighbor's life. Etc. Fundamentalists have turned these commandments inside out and upside down, perverting them into rules for achieving personal piety by obeying them.

• Fundamentalism refuses to admit that many biblical ideas and stories are borrowed from other religions and from other cultures: the creation stories; tales of miracles, healings, and resurrections; virgin-born sons of gods who died to save others; promises of life after death, ascensions; etc. Every primitive religion is filled with blood sacrifice to or by the gods. The only thing unique about fundamentalism is its claim to uniqueness.

• Fundamentalism obscures the rich ambiguity of most important choices, replacing intrinsic and authentic uncertainty with artificial certainty. I cherish Bonhoeffer's quote of Aeschylus: "Right strives with right."

• Fundamentalism inhibits one's ability to experience the soul-stirring exhilaration of awe, replacing the sheer mystery of life and of living with concocted explanations. Zorba the Greek had it right when he said, "Life is absurd." That's as close as we'll ever get to an understanding or explanation of life.

• Fundamentalism destroys the significance, the mystery, and the finality of death with stories based on a world view that hasn't existed for 500 years. As Camus points out, "The meaning of life is that it ends."

• We still use anachronistic idioms left over from the 3-story universe. We speak of "higher ambitions," knowing that we're not talking about ambitions farther from the center of the earth. Fundamentalists can't distinguish idioms or myths from facts. Civil contracts speak of "acts of god," clearly referring to flood, lightning, hurricanes, etc. Fundamentalists think these really are "acts of God."

• Fundamentalism prohibits probing the depths of biblical wisdom and insight, requiring instead the idiocy of literalism.

• Fundamentalism eliminates the struggle for responsible action, requiring instead the slavery of unquestioning obedience to rigid norms of behavior.

• Fundamentalism subverts creativity, diversity, and freedom in favor of conformity and submitting to tradition and authority.

• Fundamentalism requires corruption of the intellect, resulting in theological schizophrenia between what we know about the world on weekdays and how we must think about it on Sundays. Take away the supernatural, and fundamentalists are left with nothing to say. As Bishop Spong correctly points out, in a healthy person, the heart cannot accept what the mind rejects. Or, as Bultmann points out, "I refuse not to know what I know. Given that, what does it mean to be a man of faith?"

• Fundamentalism refuses to recognize that it is only through metaphor and poetry that we can give expression to the realities of our deepest and innermost being, thereby denying to its followers any ability to plumb these depths.

On certain occasions, I have been known to say to Helen, "Oh, yes! The ground moved, time stood still, and I saw fireworks." It has nothing whatsoever to do with geology or chronology or pyrotechnics. She knows exactly what I mean, and so do you. How do you know? Because you, too, have experienced that experience. At least, I hope you have. Are my words absolutely true? Yes. Literally true? Absolutely not. But if the literalists heard that statement the same way they read the Bible, they would rush off to check the Richter scale and a calendar and call the Sugar Land Fire Department. How else do you talk about the most real and profound human experiences except by metaphor?

When our daughters were small, we took camping vacations. One evening as we sat around the campfire roasting marshmallows, I commented on the beautiful sunset. Our daughters quickly pointed out that it wasn't a sunset, but an earthturn. That seems to me to state the facts, but completely fails to convey the truth of my experience.

• Fundamentalism substitutes for the Ground of Being, for the enigmatic powers that give life its meaning, a cheap brass-plated idol created by man in his own image.

• Tillich points out that the all-determining fact of one's life is how we respond to our propensity to live in illusions rather than to face reality. Fundamentalism, however, embraces the illusion that the all-determining fact of one's life is having the right set of beliefs.

• Niebuhr describes the church as the social pioneer. In stark contrast, fundamentalism is the social caboose. As patriarchical, homophobic organizations, fundamentalist churches would be in violation of federal laws prohibiting discrimination if they weren't exempt because they were churches. One church in my neighborhood has its patriarchical nature literally carved in stone on its front lawn, where it proclaims itself to be "Fishers of Men."

• At its root, fundamentalism is a system of a stupefying control of thought and behavior through fear.

And the only antidote is Contemporary Theology.

These are just some of the reasons fundamentalism is bad theology. I need to add here an important caveat: If Billy Graham is anywhere near right, then I, for one, am in very deep trouble. And he will have the last laugh for a very, very long time.

Now I'm a great supporter of the freedom of religion, and I will defend with my life anyone's right to believe whatever they wish with no limits whatsoever. (Incidentally, I also will be glad, given an appropriate opportunity, to point out alternatives which I consider more appropriate, more authentic, and more helpful.) But, at the most basic level, if anyone insists on believing the moon is made out of green cheese, or that the earth is flat, that's OK with me. However, we mostly have had the good sense to draw the line when practices resulting from such religious freedom do serious public harm. For example, we prosecute as criminals parents who withhold medical care from their children because of their literalism.

Not only is fundamentalism bad theology, but also it promotes bad public policy. Prior to the eighteenth century, all political and economic systems were hierarchical, patriarchical, hereditary, and theocratic. Remember the "divine right of kings," when only God's representative on Earth-the Pope or Archbishop-had the power to crown? Power flowed down from the king at the top and God was picking the king at the top. How did that work out? Well, William Manchester's history of the Middle Ages, which was marked by religion's control over governments, is aptly titled, The World Lit Only by Fire.

Well, Washington and Jefferson and Franklin and Adams and those other guys decided God had been doing so poorly at picking rulers that they would fire him from that job, and the people would have a turn at picking their own leaders. In fact, that seemed like such a good idea that they specified that religion was required to stay the hell out of our government's affairs altogether. They thought this so important that they made it the first provision of the First Amendment of our new Constitution. Further, Article 6 declares, "No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." This was exactly the opposite of every other system of government since the beginning of time.

It's easy to miss how revolutionary this revolution really was. By comparison, the war to win independence from Britain was almost incidental. This revolution literally turned the power structure upside down. Instead of power starting with religion at the top and flowing downward through kings chosen by God, now all of the power started at the bottom and flowed upward to the leaders chosen by the people, and religion was barred from participating at all. "Separation of church and state" is far too weak a phrase to describe this importance. These guys realized that to make the revolutionary idea of a democracy work at all required the equally revolutionary idea of a totally secular government. Lose one and you lose the other. Rev. Ayers summed it up pretty well in his article, "Thank God We Have a Godless Constitution" (The Center for Progressive Christianity, December 2005, p. 1f).

Although it was our founding fathers who literally invented the secular state, we're rapidly losing that crucial treasure. Now, we are well on the road to a return to the hierarchical, patriarchical, hereditary, homophobic, theocratic world that predated that eighteenth century revolution. One of this Foundation's recent weekend speakers demonstrated how the Roman emperors ruled the Empire-and the world-by manipulating four forces: religion, family values, patriotism, and military might. I find that more than a little scary. But fundamentalism would destroy the separation of church and state, which is a foundation of our democracy.

• Fundamentalism would deny equality and basic human rights and values to those they would marginalize, including especially women, bisexuals, and homosexuals.

• Fundamentalism would deny the next generation the best education we know how to give it. For example, it mistakes creationism or "intelligent design" for science. As Steven Jay Gould has testified, it would make as much sense to teach intelligent design along with evolution as it would to teach levitation along with gravity.

• Fundamentalism would prohibit scientific research in fields that offer promise of the prevention, cure, or even elimination of some diseases.

• Fundamentalism would deny people's dominion over their own bodies, e.g., the right to abortion, to physician-assisted suicide and birth control.

• Especially the millenniumists would have us ignore as irrelevant the population explosion, environmental devastation, global warming, a peaceful settlement of the Israel/Palestinian crisis-and even war itself, since wars and rumors of war will bring Jesus' return that much sooner.

Incidentally, Carl Sagan calculated that, even if Jesus ascended at the speed of light 2000 years ago, He still hasn't even left our galaxy. So, I don't expect His return anytime soon. He hasn't even gotten "there" yet.

• Our present administration is openly and proudly theocratic and fundamentalist.

• If you want to sleep soundly tonight, then don't think about the fact that the strongest economic and military forces in history, combined with the mass media, are entirely in the control of mega-corporations and fundamentalists.

And the only antidote is Contemporary Theology.

The source of much of this foolishness is that fundamentalism is frozen in time. Many of today's critical problems either didn't exist or weren't recognized as such in biblical times: ecological concerns, women's rights, slavery, racial equality, universal health care, democracy, world peace, the population explosion, etc. were simply not perceived as problems. For example, in biblical times, given the high infant mortality rate and short life expectancies, a central issue was maintaining a high enough birth rate to insure continuation of the tribe. Today, our population problem is precisely the opposite.

Often, fundamentalism just lacks plain old horse sense. For example, it confers the same importance to the Bible's command that wives must obey their husbands that it does to the Bible's admonition to love your neighbor. Of course, not only is this bad theology; fundamentalism makes for disastrous public policy.

All the examples I've given are valid subjects for public debate, as are most subjects. The problem is that fundamentalism refuses to debate public policy issues in the context of what is good public policy and social justice. Instead, they debate them in the context of what the Bible says.

For example, Pat Robertson recently explained that Prime Minister Sharon's stroke was God's punishment for his dealings with the Palestinians. When criticized, his response was disarmingly simple. He was just pointing out what everyone already knew: The Bible clearly says God gave that land to the Israelites, and it therefore belonged to them alone. No one can argue that the Bible doesn't say exactly that. To say that literalism makes for poor public policy is far too weak. Condoning fundamentalism is nothing short of suicidal.

No democracy can survive such madness. A theocracy has the answers even before the questions are asked. A qualifying mark of a democracy is that it strives to take responsible actions in the only world we know-in Bonhoeffer's words, a world "... wholly within the domain of relativity, wholly in the twilight which the historical situation spreads over good and evil; it is performed in the midst of the innumerable perspectives in which every given phenomenon appears. It has not to decide simply between right and wrong and between good and evil, but between right and right, and between wrong and wrong" (Dietrich Bonhoeffer's Ethics, p. 249).

So, why does fundamentalism, in varying degrees of severity, seem so overwhelmingly popular? Why is Jerry Falwell one of the most recognizable names in America? How does Joel Osteen fill the old Compaq center for four services every Sunday-eight services every week? And we can't fill the Forest Club once a month? Of course there are lots of reasons: Fundamentalism offers comfort, certainty, security, and answers to unanswerable questions. All at no cost.

A major reason given today is that fundamentalism offers an escape from modernity, which it does. In biblical times and until about the eighteenth century, ordinary objective knowledge and mythic expression of our Spirit lived side by side with each other-without conflict. However, as the scientific era emerged, the power of myths was lost and mythic expression began to be taken literally, giving rise to fundamentalism. As Catholics have their infallible pope, the Protestants have their paper pope-the infallible Bible. They mistakenly assumed that this was the only way to defend the message of the Bible against the growing onslaught of scientific knowledge and the inexorable move to the scientific paradigm. The other side of the coin is that liberal, more scientific-minded Christians also lost the power that only myths can have. Having no good way to talk about the message of the Bible, they tended to abandon the Bible and Christianity altogether, or-perhaps even worse-to twist the deep Christian breakthrough into a shallow moralism or sentimentality. Of course, the same thing was happening within Judaism and the Talmud and within Muslims and the Koran.

Good Contemporary Theology is the antidote to all this, for it gives both fundamentalists and liberals a way to interpret the Bible and tradition in ways that are both intellectually honest and profound in the depths of our being. It allows us to see that the biblical writers were not literalists, but mythic thinkers who were expressing the deep experiences of their own actual lives, using the metaphors of their day. Contemporary Theology allows us to see how we can say the same things about our lives, but in our own contemplative or existential, post-mythic language
.
Let me say that again: Contemporary Theology allows us to see that the biblical writers were not literalists, but mythic thinkers who were expressing the deep experiences of their own actual lives, using the metaphors of their day. Contemporary Theology allows us to see how we can say the same things about our lives, but in our own contemplative or existential, post-mythic language. When did I have my last burning bush experience? I.e., when was I most recently confronted with an impossible demand on my life? When did the Red Sea open for me? I.e., when was the last time a brick wall collapsed to reveal a universe of possibilities? When was the last time I walked on the turbulent waters of life, rising above the chaos and the fear? When was the last time I died to my illusions about life and was resurrected to Reality and to living realistically? Reading it metaphorically, the whole Bible suddenly becomes an open book-a book about my life!

Despite the fact there have been many good modern technical translations of the Bible, we still lack what I call a metaphorical translation. By that, I mean we desperately need and don't yet have what Bultmann described as an "existential interpretation" or "demythologizing" of the Bible-a Bible that speaks of the profundity of our human existence-yours and mine-in metaphors of our day.

Meanwhile the fundamentalists of the world continue defending their literalistic interpretations. They are a reactionary movement, an attempt to recover a time in the past that never actually existed. They are a recently conceived movement that is moving away from a real experience of their own lives and away from a valid interpretation of the heritage they claim to honor.

I'm convinced that some fundamentalist leaders aren't fooled and know exactly what they're doing-especially those who have attended the more respectable seminaries, such as those from which the Foundation has drawn speakers. But most fundamentalists are people that just don't know any better. They aren't aware of a viable alternative to fundamentalism. You either "believe," or you don't. If you don't, then you're an atheist, a heathen, i.e., a "bad" person. Most so-called "atheists" are such because they refuse to believe in a supernatural supreme being who suspends the natural laws and intervenes in human affairs at will. Well, so do I refuse to believe in such a so-called "god."

To the degree that fundamentalists see no viable alternative to literalism and to belief in such a supreme being, it's our fault. We just aren't doing our job.

I've taught adult Sunday school all of my adult life. What I'm calling here the Contemporary Theology alternative came crashing uninvitedly into my life when-about 40 years ago-Don Sinclair, whom some of you know, encouraged me to take a weekend theology course given by the Ecumenical Institute. For me, that course brought the cozy comforts of my fundamentalistic universe tumbling down, bringing with it all of the literalistic fantasies I had ever known. I heard for the first time that, rather than some supernatural supreme being who suspends the laws of nature and intervenes in the lives of mortals at will, God is that enigmatic power that not only limits everything we care about, but also supports us in our cares for an expanded life; that the Christ Word, rather than that I'm going to heaven when I die, is the Word that repeatedly shatters my illusions and invites me back home to Reality; that the Holy Spirit, rather than some supernatural impulse from above, is the ontological demand to freedom, to be responsible in the real world of ambiguity; and that to be the Church, rather than the road to piety and good works, is to be the social pioneer on behalf of all. But, most important of all, I learned the ultimate test for good theology: Is that the way life is for me?

That is how Contemporary Theology came to me. Before that weekend, I just hadn't known any alternative. I just didn't know any better.

Contemporary Theology is nothing more or less than The Truth About Life, or-more precisely-the constant struggle to seek after that Truth. One of my favorite Bible stories is about Jacob wrestling with the angel. At the end of the wrestling match, the angel said to Jacob, "You have striven with God and have not been subdued." Therefore, all of my Sunday School classes-in Houston, Pittsburgh, and Boston-have been named, "The Strivers." That's our job as humans: to strive with Reality, and not be subdued-to wrestle with Final Reality, with the Full Awesomeness of What Is Happening-and not be subdued. One of the proudest moments of my life occurred when Smoky Fraser said to me in Lexington, MA, "Ben, I never did really believe any of that stuff, but I didn't know until now that it was OK not to." That's our job: To let the world know that "it's OK not to."

We must not take fundamentalism lightly. It is not just another way of being Christian. It is destroying both the riches of the past and the possibilities for a viable future. It is a form of despair over life, not trusting in the goodness of Reality. We are tempted to minimize fundamentalism's dangers, content to laugh at the more absurd pronouncements by some of their more outlandish spokesmen. But we must dispel fundamentalism, offering instead a Christianity whose power lies in its authenticity and which is built upon Good Contemporary Theology.

What do I mean by "Good Contemporary Theology?" Some of its qualities would include:

• Contemporary Theology is non-literalistic, non-exclusive, and non-dogmatic.

• Contemporary Theology is perfectly compatible with the best of contemporary science. A recent Foundation program was entitled, "Religion and Science: Controversy or Convergence?" I insist that it's neither of these. One test of good science and good theology is whether they are perfectly complementary.

• Contemporary Theology is dynamic, i.e., willing, ready, able, and even eager to change. I find it remarkable that scientists reward revolutionary innovations with a Nobel Prize, while fundamentalists reward revolutionary innovations by burning the revolutionary at the stake-either literally or metaphorically.

Hans Káng, a contemporary Roman Catholic priest and theologian teaching in Tübingen University in Germany, wrote books with titles like Does God Exist? and Infallible? and The Pope's Contradictions. In 1979 he was summoned to the Vatican by the Inquisition. He replied to the effect, "You must be crazy. Do you think I never read a history book? If you want to talk to me, you come here, and we'll talk in Germany."

• Contemporary Theology offers the possibility of a full life, including peace with justice-and a welcome back to Reality to every prodigal.

• Contemporary Theology deals effectively with the contemporary problems of people and of society. Therefore, it is in constant flux, and can never be nailed down. Its job is never finished.

• Contemporary Theology thrives on diversity, open and honest dissension, innovation, research, and novelty.

• Contemporary Theology judges all of the Bible by the best of the Bible.

• Contemporary Theology abhors control and fear.

• A crucial hallmark of Contemporary Theology is its intellectual integrity.

• Contemporary Theology's only authority is the authenticity of human experience.

• Contemporary Theology isn't about supreme beings, or the supernatural, or the miraculous, and most certainly it is not about life after death. Contemporary Theology is about our relationship to Reality, caring for our neighbor, and becoming fully human: how to live more wisely and well, here and now.

I believe that only in such a Contemporary Theology does our hope lie in recovering a livable world and a democratic society of, by, and for the people. All of our theological heroes are heroes exactly because they developed what was-for their day-their own contemporary theology: Moses, Amos, Jesus, Paul, Peter, Augustine, Aquinas, Luther, Wesley, Kierkegaard, Gandhi, Barth, Bultmann, Bonhoeffer, Tillich, the Niebuhrs, M. L. King, Jr., etc. If you don't think Contemporary Theology is important, just stop and realize more than one third of these guys were killed because they did such an effective job. Now, the task has fallen to us. Now, we must add our own names to that list.

Just as war is too important to be left to the generals, and our health is too important to be left to the physicians, so Contemporary Theology is far too important to be left to the clergy. Jesus was a carpenter, Paul was a tent-maker, Peter was a fisherman, and I am a chemical engineer. Contemporary Theology is a secular task. It's our job-the people here in this room today. We must not fail.

It's really easy to be a fundamentalist. All you have to do is cling tenaciously to a few simplistic ideas, pretending what you have done is both honest and noble. Contemporary Theology requires that you think for yourself-that you be awake, aware, responsive, and responsible. That can take-and make-a whole life.

That's what's so important about Contemporary Theology.


The Striver, by Gustav Doré 1855

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Ben Ball holds BS and MS degrees in chemical engineering from M.I.T. and completed the Advanced Management Program at the Harvard Graduate School of Business. After 30 years with Gulf Oil Corporation, he retired as Corporate Vice President. He was for 25 years on the staff and faculty at M.I.T. where he held several appointments including Adjunct Professor of Management and Engineering. He has consulted to and done expert testimony for several dozen corporations and governments worldwide, and he has lectured at several universities. He was a senior faculty member of the Ecumenical Institute of Chicago and is certified by the United Methodist Church as Adult Laboratory Leader. One hundred of his articles have been published, mostly in professional journals on the subjects of strategy, energy policy, and energy economics.

He and Helen, his wife of 57 years, live in Sugar Land, TX, near their three daughters' families, including three sons-in-law and five grandchildren. The family of twelve customarily goes on cruises biannually, having just completed a cruise of the Caribbean. He is certified as a Class A Pistol Coach and has won several club, city, and sectional pistol championships. He holds amateur radio license WA3VTX. He is classified as a National Master at duplicate bridge, and his woodworking has won many awards, including several Best in Show. His present focus is on inlaying, ship modeling, and woodturning.

He now consults, writes, speaks, and does expert testimony, and he remains a member of several professional organizations. He is active in The Research Symposium for Christian Resurgence in the 21st Century as a founding member, as well as in The Foundation for Contemporary Theology. He may be contacted at benball@alum.mit.edu or www.benball.com.

.....click on arrow to return to top of document

Click here to return to the Home Page