BOOK REVIEW:
FIDELITY WITHOUT FUNDAMENTALISM:
A DIALOGUE WITH TRADITION
BOOK REVIEWS
Fidelity without Fundamentalism:
A Dialogue with Tradition
Hughes, G. J. (2010)
London: Darton, Longman & Todd / Paperback / ISBN 9780232528008 / 162 pages / RRP $36.95
Reviewed by Daniel Stollenwerk
About the reviewer
Daniel J. Stollenwerk, STD, teaches Religious Studies at St. Peter’s College, Auckland, New Zealand.
In the midst of the Second World War, Pius XII promulgated Divino Afflante
Spiritu thus distancing the Roman Catholic Church from that wing of
Christianity that espouses a literalist interpretation of Sacred Scripture:
Fundamentalism.
In his most recent book, however, the former Chair of Philosophy and
Vice Principal of Heythrop College, University of London, argues that
fundamentalism is not so much a set of beliefs, as it is an attitude towards
systems of beliefs and practices to which, throughout history, all religions
and societies, to some extent, have fallen prey. Today, for example, one form
of fundamentalism would see higher criticism as calling into question the
divine authority of the Bible, another would see certain morals as a menace
to the entire fabric of society and still another, immigration as a threat to the
very identity of Europe.
Jesuit Gerard Hughes begins his combat against fundamentalism by first
looking at some very non-threatening examples of translation. Translation,
he concludes, is not a mechanical process, but very much an art which must
steer a middle road between postmodernists, who think that two cultures
can never find a common meaning, and rigorists, who believe they need
but a grammar book and a large dictionary to translate meaning. He then
applies his ideas about translation to Genesis 1–3, Jonah, Job, the infancy
stories and resurrection narratives, again directing the reader down a
middle road that remains faithful to the Scriptural tradition, without veering
towards the indefensibility of literalism or the vagaries of relativism.
The unique section of the book, however, is when Hughes considers the
fundamentalist challenge to some of the more crucial points of Church
History. The first was the Council of Jerusalem in 49 AD wherein those
with fundamentalist leanings held the opinion that any follower of Jesus
74 / Journal of Catholic School Studies
must obey the Mosaic Law. Paul and Barnabas, of course, with Peter
acting as both arbiter and judge, won out; the new law in Christ would
transcend cultures.
Hughes looks as well at the controversy over the nature of Jesus. It was
not difficult to use Scripture to prove Jesus was only human or only divine.
Nicaea (325) and Chalcedon (451), however, cut a middle path, remaining
faithful to the Scriptural tradition yet translating it into a different culture
with a different language. The one Jesus was both human and divine.
Ironically, the fundamentalist reaction today is not so much scriptural as
dogmatic; it cannot see its way to translate the concepts of these pivotal
councils into a contemporary vocabulary and milieu.
According to Hughes’ understanding, fundamentalism also played a
reactionary role in the great Western revolutionary movements of the
second millennium after Christ. Among others, St. Thomas confronted the
Aristotelian challenge of the 12th and 13th centuries. He did not reject the
movement’s science, ethics, vocabulary and, essentially, all-encompassing
worldview, but rather accommodated it to his own purposes. The dogma of
transubstantiation, of course, stands out as a prime example of the Thomistic
synthesis. Again, ironically, a fundamentalist strain today has trouble using
anything but the science and vocabulary of Thomas to explain the Eucharist
in an age with a very different language and worldview.
The church’s condemnation of Galileo, according to Hughes, was yet
another example of fundamentalism’s sway over a more middle-of-theroad approach to the new, very threatening discoveries in physics and
astronomy. Some would see the 17th century Galileo affair as the beginning
of a modern split between faith and science. Viewed from the spectrum
of fundamentalism, however, Hughes opines that the religion vs. science
debate that still rages today has not changed substantially since the much
earlier Aristotelian challenge of the 12th century.
Of course fundamentalism gained a following in church circles again in
the 19th and 20th centuries in reaction to the revolutionary findings of
linguistics, archeology and biblical criticism. Today, most would say that
these new sciences aided the church to better understand Scripture.
Moreover, it would seem that the Roman Catholic Church has overcome
the fundamentalist temptation. In the last chapters of his book, however,
Hughes considers the contemporary influence of fundamentalism on such
issues as pacifism, women’s ordination, genetic manipulation and the very
definition of life and death. Furthermore, he adds, biblical translation is not
only about word; it’s also about action. What does it mean to follow Jesus
today? As Jesus once dined with tax collectors and sinners, one might ask,
should we today sit at table with abortionists and paedophiles?
Hughes wrote Fidelity without Fundamentalism for the educated lay person;
however a good dose of previous theological background would help. It’s
historically based; it’s intellectually, even ethically challenging. It’s helpful
for religious educators wanting to keep up on with one of the more pressing
issues of the day.
Volume 84 / Issue 1 / May–June 2012 / 75