My Two Cents on Unplugged Stereotypes

“Shwew!”  What an interesting and educational few weeks it has been!  It seems that the dust from the stampede caused by Jason Janz’s article on “End of the Spear” is beginning to settle.  Attention has shifted from the conflict itself to an assessment of the collateral damage.  Another scene of the drama has closed with the publishing of Dr. Kevin Bauder’s apology earlier today.

So now what?  Well, I imagine that everyone is ready to move on, and that’s a tremendous idea.  However, I think we would be wise to spend a little time reflecting on lessons learned–we need a “debriefing,” if you will.  I’m not calling for a rehashing of the debate, but I do think that a ”discussion of the discussion” is in order.

So what have the last three weeks taught us about the state of Christianity in America?  Among other things, I am struck by the “unplugging” of several stereotypes.  For years we have been subjected to a stereotype–a caricature–of fundamentalism.  Since the very beginning of the division between fundamentalists and evangelicals we have heard that fundamentalists are backward, arrogant and divisive.  Although there are certainly individuals in both camps that fit that description, we’ve been too willing to accept the stereotype as fact.  I believe that the last three weeks have allowed us to see once again that the stereotypes of fundamentalism need to be unplugged.

Unplugged Stereotype #1:  Evangelicals are humble, whereas Fundamentalists are proud.

Although fundamentalists have not been without fault in this controversy, they have responded to challenges with a humility that is exemplary.  I appreciated Jason Janz’s apology for some errors in the original article, though I felt he took more blame than necessary.  And I am grateful for Dr. Bauder’s extremely gracious response.  The humility he displayed in a difficult circumstance speaks well of him.  The fundamentalist “players” in this drama, though not perfect, have responded with a humble and teachable spirit which, to be honest, has been conspicuously absent from our evangelical brethren.

Though Dr. Bauder refrained from rehearsing these points himself, there are several things which his apology did not do:

• It did not remove the folly of ETE’s casting decision (to beat a dead horse one more time).
• It did not remove the folly of their unbending justification of that decision.
• It did not remove the folly of evangelical leaders who bought and defended that justification.
• It did not remove the folly–and mean-spiritedness–of ETE’s appeal to the FBI(!) as reported by the NYT(!).

Appropriate admission of wrong by one party must not be interpreted to be an exonoration of the other.  We still need to think biblically even as we admire the humility of Dr. Bauder and Jason Janz.

Fundamentalists are arrogant?  Evangelicals are humble?  It is obviously impossible to make such broad generalities.  I’m not suggesting that pride is a necessary part of evangelicalism.  Indeed, I know many evangelicals who are the picture of meekness.  To describe the movement as “proud” would be unjust…as unjust as tying that can to the heels of fundamentalists for the last 50 years.  Thankfully, fundamentalists have demonstrated a genuine humility–a humility which I believe is part of our heritage.  Let’s unplug that stereo.

Unplugged Stereotype #2:  Evangelicals are loving, whereas Fundamentalists are harsh and unreasonable. 

Evangelicals are supposed to be the gentle guys.  Yet, Janz took it on the chin from the left for pointing out an obvious error.  He bent over backwards to fairly represent ETE, publishing their statements, correcting his own, apologizing repeatedly.  Yet, even his apology was considered unsatisfactory.  Although portrayed by men like Randy Alcorn as a false witness and gossip, Janz’s response has been very gracious.  Both he and Dr. Bauder have refused to defend themselves or fight back. 

For the last three weeks, it has been the fundamentalists who have loved the truth, the church and the Lord Himself enough to address this issue head on.  Have they contended?  Absolutely.  Have they been unloving?  Absolutely not.  Perhaps the derisive stereotype of an unloving and “fightin’ fundy” is ready to be retired once and for all.  Let’s unplug that stereo.

Unplugged Stereotype #3:  Evangelicals are thinkers, whereas & Fundamentalists are simple.

Perhaps the longest standing charge against fundamentalists is that they are unintellectual…that they’re not thinkers.  Yet, it is the fundamentalists who have been determined to think objectively and biblically about this issue.  For the most part, the “thinking” evangelicals have “felt” their way through the last three weeks.  Their lack of disciplined and principled thinking has been appalling.  Yet, such “squishy” reasoning is becoming all too common in their movement.  Unthinking fundamentalists?  Let’s unplug that stereo.

Unplugged Stereotype #4:  Evangelicals are engaging our culture, whereas Fundamentalists are isolated from it.

Truth be known, evangelicals are engaged in our culture, and this issue is merely one example of many.  Fundamentalists have addressed this controversy with biblical truth, and they have done so publicly.  Though misunderstood and misrepresented, they have brought the truth to bear on a situation affecting the church, its gospel and its testimony before the lost.  Isolated?  Out of touch?  Let’s unplug that stereo.

Unplugged Stereotype #5:  Evangelicals are about evangelism, whereas fundamentalists are about in-fighting.

In the name of evangelism, evangelical leaders have promoted “End of the Spear” almost without exception.  Yet, fundamentalists have noted (1) that the choice of the messenger undermined the message and (2) that the makers of this would-be gospel film forgot one thing: the gospel.  Sadly, this is another trend that is all too common among evangelicals: gospel messages that lack the gospel message.  Preaching has too often been replaced by singing and filmmaking and novel-writing, and the gospel has been increasingly muted in order to “gain a hearing.”  (A hearing for what, exactly?)  Thankfully, Janz did more than confront an error; he defended the gospel.  Fundamentalists ignore evangelism?  Let’s unplug that stereo.

I’ll conclude with one more stereotype–one that young fundamentalists have perhaps created themselves.

Unplugged Stereotype #6:  Young fundamentalists will garner respect, whereas our forebears invited reproach.

In my opinion, no young fundamentalist has been more concerned about fundamentalism’s rapport with the world and with evangelicalism than Jason Janz.  Over a year ago, Janz reasoned that old-school fundamentalists were fighters and separatists and builders.  Those days were gone, he reasoned:

“[The grandsons, those 35 and under,] will refine the movement.  [They] will not be characterized as fighters or builders. They will take the movement, the institutions, and the churches and polish the edges.”  (from The Future Fundamentalists)

Many young men concurred, picturing a fundamentalism devoid of the conflict that surrounded previous generations of fundamentalists.  Yet, just over a year later Janz is in the middle of this fray.  He was “fighting,” not by choice, but because the truth was at stake.  And what was the result?  He has been criticized.  He has been misrepresented.  He has been portrayed as a reckless, divisive troublemaker.  Why?  Because of his spirit?  No, his spirit has been as gentle as it could be in such a controversy.  He has been maligned because of his stand.  Despite his carefulness to speak kindly of those on his left, when he correctly addressed one of their errors, he was often written off as a “typical fundamentalist.” 

I don’t fault Jason for what he did.  Indeed, I’ve applauded and defended him.  He did the right thing; it just didn’t go over the way young guys thought it would.  As nice as we may think we are, standing for truth invites reproach.  It’s not a personality issue; it’s a principle issue.  The reproach that comes from contending for the faith is unavoidable.  Though I’m genuinely glad for the focus on graciousness and servitude, there is no such thing as a “non-militant” fundamentalism.  Our generation has just witnessed that fact from the front row.

Perhaps some young fundamentalists are “coming of age.”  Perhaps we’re learning that our predecessors weren’t as wrong as we have assumed.  Perhaps we’ll empathize more with generations of fundamentalists whom we have sometimes written off as eccentrics or for whom we’ve felt obligated to apologize.  Perhaps we’re learning that what separates fundamentalists from evangelicals is not merely an aisle (as though this were mere political partisanship), but a chasm–a chasm of opposing ideologies and priorities and even theologies.  The non-negotiables for fundamentalists are truth and purity and holiness; the non-negotiables for evangelicals appear to be relevance and unity and efficiency. 

Perhaps, at the end of the ruckus, we have a better understanding of our position and the Scripture which requires it, a better appreciation for our heritage and a deeper commitment to stand for the truth, regardless of the cost.  Now that’s a stereo we can all live with.  Plug it in.  Turn it up.