An e-mail I sent to Phil Johnson who’s ignited quite a storm with his criticism of fundamentalism.
I've been thoroughly enjoying the discussion/controversy over your second presentation about the problems in fundamentalism. (A lot of commentary on a lot of different blogs; Chailies.com got things rolling). The closest I ever got to fundamentalism was being a student at Biola in 66/67. That was more a Sam Sutherland fundamentalism than anything else. That, by the way, is where I first became aware of JM. I think SEPARATION is to fundamentalism what CELIBACY is to Roman Catholicism. It is the poison that both defines them and sickens them guaranteeing that the Baptist Ayatollahs and Priest Pedophiles will always be a problem. They can't give it up (separationism and celibacy) because it does define and separate them from others. Without separationism the fundamentalists would just be a more conservative SBC variant and the RC's would be reunited with the Orthodox if they abandoned the celibacy of the priests. Ain't gonna happen is it. But the poison continues to sicken and destroy.Separation allows the narcissistic sociopaths like Hyles, Gray and Peter Ruckman to always have a more influential voice then the Kevin Bauders. Kevin will never win the battle; he's an honest man, they are not. There is no lie they will not state, no exaggeration they will hold back while Kevin swims uphill in his desire to be honest. The liars will win here (in the immediate sense). As for celibacy, was there ever a more effective satanic devise to guarantee a corrupt priesthood. Sexually confused guys with a religious bent will gravitate towards the priesthood and towards each other. Voila, the RC's have paid out millions and have millions more to go. Sexual shenanigans from the sexually repressed will continue.
Of course rampant alcoholism in the priesthood is a consequence of the heresy of celibacy.
For what it’s worth….