And Lucidus Said:

(Lucidus posted the following comment about fundamentalism, except it was too long for the comment box so I'm reposting it here):

"I'd be interested to know exactly do you mean by "fundamentalism"? You don't set out what you meant by it, when you used it as a 17 year old. I infer from your writing that what you yourself meant by it, was different by what the person you were speaking to, understood by it? And I take it, that either your understanding of the word has changed over a decade, or that your definition of the word has remained more or less the same, but you no longer hold onto that definition as your definition of a Christian?

My frustration is that these sort of words have lost all objectively designated meaning. 'Fundamentalism' as a term was coined in mere reaction of the modern controversy - between orthodoxy and liberal Christians - and a bunch of Christians wrote a series of books/pamphlets entitled "Fundamentals", outlining what they saw as the central tenets of Christian belief, derived from the Bible and according to the Creeds of the Church. The word itself had no loaded meaning, simply beyond stating that a person subscribed to the basic orthodox teachings of the church.

In some Christian circles (tho' rarer and rarer nowadays), I think this word is still used in that sense. Essentially a proud and unashamed declaration of Orthodoxy.

Those who use it are often unaware or defiant of the fact that in general parlance, 'fundamentalism' is a loaded term - so full of prejudice, ambiguity and anger - that it's essentially lost all sense of objective definition' it's become an emotional umbrella term for all manner of evil.

My point is this: one needs, I think, to understand the nature and position of the word in the world and be prepared to mediate between those who use it as a subjective definition and as an objective definition.

As a Christian, I don't think there is need to take on the emotional burden of the word, nor be embarrassed by it. *Of course* Christianity isn't on about all the terrible things people ascribe to the word 'fundamentalism.'

Distinguish between what you're talking about and move on.

But an additional suggestion would be to ditch the word altogether, placing it with other unfortunately words in our language that have lost its semantic value.

JI Packer wrote a book in 1958 suggesting that we remove the word from our vocabulary because it's impossible to be used without a long-winded explanation as to what you do NOT mean by it. Which means it's , entirely unhelpful as a word, and as a way to open discussion - unless you want to cause controversy and engage in a discussion stemming from it - which is not entirely without merit if you're in the right crowd."