I’m nearly finished reading Malise Ruthven’s Fundamentalism: The Search for Meaning (ISBN 0192806068), in it he talks about “catholic” fundamentalism which, if one accepts traditional definistions of the term, is . . . well a contradiction of catholicism. Ruthven is looking at a broad spectrum to re-describe fundamentalism so that the term is more accurate. Reading his discussion on “catholic” fundamentalism or “integralism” (a new word to me – I always associated “catholic” fundamentalism with ultramontanism) I started thinking about some of the newer emerging OC/IC/ISM groups, that can easily be described as fundamentalist (sedevantists, the Charismatic Episcopal, and others) it dawned on me how antithetical the our OC/IC heritage “fundamentalism” is.

Key to the fundamentalist view of the world, and theology is the rejection of the modern (though not always in ways we might expect) “modernism” “liberalism” the ideas inherent in them that were the back bone of the foundation of the OC movement in the late 19th century, and Gallicanism before it.

Now, I acknowledge that not all ISM groups find their root in the 19th century OC movement (if your lines are from Vilatte then you most certainly do) – and I accept that that realisation might raise a whole host of other questions (no less interesting) – what I am curious about though is how the number of OC/IC groups which for example, reject such “modernist” ideals as the ordination of women, the full participation of LGBT folk, and many aspects of biblical and theological scholarship, see themselves as a part of our collective heritage?

Ending on a brighter note I share with you a wonderful vid forwarded to me by a very close friend which makes a really well crafted statement on the effects of fundamentalist thinking.