What do you think?
Rate this book
Fundamentalism and American Culture
Many Americans today are taking note of the surprisingly strong political force that is the religious right. Controversial decisions by the government are met with hundreds of lobbyists, millions of dollars of advertising spending, and a powerful grassroots response. How has the fundamentalist movement managed to resist the pressures of the scientific community and the draw of modern popular culture to hold on to their ultra-conservative Christian views? Understanding the movement's history is key to answering this question. Fundamentalism and American Culture has long been considered a classic in religious history, and to this day remains unsurpassed. Now available in a new edition, this highly regarded analysis takes us through the full history of the origin and direction of one of America's most influential religious movements.
For Marsden, fundamentalists are not just religious conservatives; they are conservatives who are willing to take a stand and to fight. In Marsden's words (borrowed by Jerry Falwell), "a fundamentalist is an evangelical who is angry about something." In the late nineteenth century American Protestantism was gradually dividing between liberals who were accepting new scientific and higher critical views that contradicted the Bible and defenders of the more traditional evangelicalism. By the 1920s a full-fledged "fundamentalist" movement had developed in protest against theological changes in the churches and changing mores in the culture. Building on networks of evangelists, Bible conferences, Bible institutes, and missions agencies, fundamentalists coalesced into a major protest movement that proved to have remarkable staying power.
For this new edition, a major new chapter compares fundamentalism since the 1970s to the fundamentalism of the 1920s, looking particularly at the extraordinary growth in political emphasis and power of the more recent movement. Never has it been more important to understand the history of fundamentalism in our rapidly polarizing nation. Marsen's carefully researched and engrossing work remains the best way to do just that.
For Marsden, fundamentalists are not just religious conservatives; they are conservatives who are willing to take a stand and to fight. In Marsden's words (borrowed by Jerry Falwell), "a fundamentalist is an evangelical who is angry about something." In the late nineteenth century American Protestantism was gradually dividing between liberals who were accepting new scientific and higher critical views that contradicted the Bible and defenders of the more traditional evangelicalism. By the 1920s a full-fledged "fundamentalist" movement had developed in protest against theological changes in the churches and changing mores in the culture. Building on networks of evangelists, Bible conferences, Bible institutes, and missions agencies, fundamentalists coalesced into a major protest movement that proved to have remarkable staying power.
For this new edition, a major new chapter compares fundamentalism since the 1970s to the fundamentalism of the 1920s, looking particularly at the extraordinary growth in political emphasis and power of the more recent movement. Never has it been more important to understand the history of fundamentalism in our rapidly polarizing nation. Marsen's carefully researched and engrossing work remains the best way to do just that.
468 pages, Paperback
First published February 1, 1981
81 people are currently reading
1792 people want to read
About the author
George M. Marsden
47 books111 followersGeorge M. Marsden is the Francis A. McAnaney Professor of History Emeritus at the University of Notre Dame. He has written extensively on the interaction between Christianity and the American culture and has published numerous books, including Jonathan Edwards: A Life, which won the prestigious Bancroft Prize given for the best work of history. He lives in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 110 reviews
September 21, 2021
It Must Be In the Water
In a previous review I put forward the suggestion that the evangelical movement in the United States is not comprehensible as a religious movement at all. (https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...) While maintaining the nominal title of ‘Christian’ the various sects which participate in this movement, from traditionalist Catholics to holiness Pentecostals, to Mormons have almost nothing in common theologically. Rather, the binding force among the participants is ethical and collective not doctrinal and personal; that is to say, it is political. The evangelical common cause is the execution of a political agenda which is headlined by their Big Four issues of abortion, gay sex and marriage, global warming, and evolution. Not all segments of the coalition adopt all four issues but endorsement of any one is sufficient for political alliance.
I further suggested that these issues were likely manifestations of more fundamental social sentiment, that the moral outrage expressed about each of the Big Four pointed not to social welfare as their aim but to their own political advantage. I put forward the hypothesis that the advantage they seek is the re-establishment of some sort of social equality. This equality is not simply a matter of legal standing or economics, but of a kind of general respectability which they feel has been denied them through a variety of social changes in the United States brought about by technology, immigration, global economics and what might be called a reduction in traditional reputational opportunities.
Marsden‘s classic history of Fundamentalism and American Culture is an important source for assessing whether my hypothesis has any validity. Marsden, like Jonathan Dudley of Broken Words, is an evangelical. He is also a widely respected historian. So, unlike mine, his motives are clean. Nonetheless, I think that even a sympathetic reading of Fundamentalism and American Culture confirms much of what I have suggested, namely that the evangelical movement from its origins was always primarily political rather than theological. It seeks to essentially reshape the legal structure of the country to eliminate what it considers Enlightenment errors. This is particularly clear from the 1870’s onwards to the end of the century as the movement began to form its explicit political existence.
The Evangelicalism that Marsden documents has three distinctive characteristics which persist from the late 19th century through today: an anti-intellectualism which rejects the validity of scientific thought; a local communal attractiveness to those who are socially needy in the traditionally bleak socio-economic context of the United States; and a susceptibility to authoritarian leadership by what can only be called religious hucksters. I will touch on each of these briefly.
Anti-Intellectualism
Marsden is very direct that “a major element in the movement, well developed in nineteenth century revivalism, was the subordination of all other concerns—including concern for all but the simplest ideas—to soul-saving and practical Christianity.” This aversion to rational thought and debate increased proportionately to the vulnerability of traditional biblical interpretations to the evidence generated by so-called higher criticism. That scriptural vulnerability was further increased by the difficulties presented by evolutionary theory. Even into the 21st century the resistance to otherwise uncontested facts of successive biblical redactions, alterations and historical interpretations carry no weight among evangelicals. Similarly, the findings of anthropological, archaeological and biological science are either ignored or explained as a sort of cosmic divine charade.
Fulfillment of Neurotic Social Need
Marsden is once again unsparing in his opinion: “My conclusion, which finds expression in a variety of specific ways, is that fundamentalists experienced profound ambivalence toward the surrounding culture.” I don’t think that it’s incorrect to imply from his remarks that this alienation a cause not a consequence for the growth of evangelicalism. The movement attracts a type. This may include those “whose common identity is substantially grounded in the fundamentalist experience of an earlier era,” as this more simple existence is eroded. But Marsden suggests a rather more complex psychology: “These fundamentalist attitudes cannot be understood in terms of a consistent ideology. They make sense only in terms of the establishment-or-outsider paradox.” On the one hand, the evangelical sentiment is one of being special, chosen, elected. But this is combined with feelings of inferiority among one’s fellow citizens. Thus there is a pattern with the movement despite its diversity: “Every new evangelical movement of this entire era, through the rise of fundamentalism and including the holiness, pentecostal, and premillennial movements, had a base in some form of ‘social religious’ gathering.”
Susceptibility to Authoritarian Leadership
“For a substantial number of Americans, or American evangelicals, something in their outlook was conducive to the authoritarian and ideological character of dispensationalism as well as to the sentiment and activism more usually associated with American revivalism.” Evangelicalism emerged from the long-standing revivalist tradition in America. The core of this tradition is the complete submission of the believer to the influence of the preacher within the context of a believing audience. In the late 19th this tradition evolved into an era of the celebrity preacher who didn’t just preach at irregular intervals. He organized and directed followers beyond a local congregation. He told these followers what to think and how to act through a network, first of publications, then of broadcast media, and most recently, of course, the internet. All rely on a charismatic personality cult with a particular skill in fund-raising rather than theology. This was a new ‘system’ of religion: “This system encouraged personal empire-building which developed during Moody’s time... “It was a religion structured according to the free enterprise system.”*
————
Marsden all but admits that the these characteristics of the evangelical movement serve a primarily political purpose. “Respectable ‘evangelicals’ in the 1870s, by the 1920s had become a laughingstock, ideological strangers in their own land.” While this may be a shared feeling it is not yet political. But Marsden goes on: “The fundamentalists’ most alarming experience was that of finding themselves living in a culture that by the 1920s was openly turning away from God.” This is not personal; it is not even spiritual. It implies a straightforward political objective: not the salvation of souls but the re-formation of American society.
What is at stake for Evangelicals is a certain kind of politics, one that restores “the Biblical foundations of American civilization.” The Dispensationalists among them, the dominant political force, say openly that their objective is to prepare for the 1000-year reign of Jesus by establishing a culture ready to receive him, including a theocratic government. I don’t think it coincidental that this sounds remarkably like the last 1000-year Reich we are familiar with. A dangerous place this America.
————
*The Chicago preacher Dwight Moody was arguably the first of these celebrity evangelists. Interestingly he too had his Big Four issues at the turn of the 20th century: “(1) the theater, (2) disregard of the Sabbath, (3) Sunday newspapers, and (4) atheistic teachings, including evolution.” These were prosecuted with equal vigour to that employed on today’s Big Four. Let us hope with equal effect.
In a previous review I put forward the suggestion that the evangelical movement in the United States is not comprehensible as a religious movement at all. (https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...) While maintaining the nominal title of ‘Christian’ the various sects which participate in this movement, from traditionalist Catholics to holiness Pentecostals, to Mormons have almost nothing in common theologically. Rather, the binding force among the participants is ethical and collective not doctrinal and personal; that is to say, it is political. The evangelical common cause is the execution of a political agenda which is headlined by their Big Four issues of abortion, gay sex and marriage, global warming, and evolution. Not all segments of the coalition adopt all four issues but endorsement of any one is sufficient for political alliance.
I further suggested that these issues were likely manifestations of more fundamental social sentiment, that the moral outrage expressed about each of the Big Four pointed not to social welfare as their aim but to their own political advantage. I put forward the hypothesis that the advantage they seek is the re-establishment of some sort of social equality. This equality is not simply a matter of legal standing or economics, but of a kind of general respectability which they feel has been denied them through a variety of social changes in the United States brought about by technology, immigration, global economics and what might be called a reduction in traditional reputational opportunities.
Marsden‘s classic history of Fundamentalism and American Culture is an important source for assessing whether my hypothesis has any validity. Marsden, like Jonathan Dudley of Broken Words, is an evangelical. He is also a widely respected historian. So, unlike mine, his motives are clean. Nonetheless, I think that even a sympathetic reading of Fundamentalism and American Culture confirms much of what I have suggested, namely that the evangelical movement from its origins was always primarily political rather than theological. It seeks to essentially reshape the legal structure of the country to eliminate what it considers Enlightenment errors. This is particularly clear from the 1870’s onwards to the end of the century as the movement began to form its explicit political existence.
The Evangelicalism that Marsden documents has three distinctive characteristics which persist from the late 19th century through today: an anti-intellectualism which rejects the validity of scientific thought; a local communal attractiveness to those who are socially needy in the traditionally bleak socio-economic context of the United States; and a susceptibility to authoritarian leadership by what can only be called religious hucksters. I will touch on each of these briefly.
Anti-Intellectualism
Marsden is very direct that “a major element in the movement, well developed in nineteenth century revivalism, was the subordination of all other concerns—including concern for all but the simplest ideas—to soul-saving and practical Christianity.” This aversion to rational thought and debate increased proportionately to the vulnerability of traditional biblical interpretations to the evidence generated by so-called higher criticism. That scriptural vulnerability was further increased by the difficulties presented by evolutionary theory. Even into the 21st century the resistance to otherwise uncontested facts of successive biblical redactions, alterations and historical interpretations carry no weight among evangelicals. Similarly, the findings of anthropological, archaeological and biological science are either ignored or explained as a sort of cosmic divine charade.
Fulfillment of Neurotic Social Need
Marsden is once again unsparing in his opinion: “My conclusion, which finds expression in a variety of specific ways, is that fundamentalists experienced profound ambivalence toward the surrounding culture.” I don’t think that it’s incorrect to imply from his remarks that this alienation a cause not a consequence for the growth of evangelicalism. The movement attracts a type. This may include those “whose common identity is substantially grounded in the fundamentalist experience of an earlier era,” as this more simple existence is eroded. But Marsden suggests a rather more complex psychology: “These fundamentalist attitudes cannot be understood in terms of a consistent ideology. They make sense only in terms of the establishment-or-outsider paradox.” On the one hand, the evangelical sentiment is one of being special, chosen, elected. But this is combined with feelings of inferiority among one’s fellow citizens. Thus there is a pattern with the movement despite its diversity: “Every new evangelical movement of this entire era, through the rise of fundamentalism and including the holiness, pentecostal, and premillennial movements, had a base in some form of ‘social religious’ gathering.”
Susceptibility to Authoritarian Leadership
“For a substantial number of Americans, or American evangelicals, something in their outlook was conducive to the authoritarian and ideological character of dispensationalism as well as to the sentiment and activism more usually associated with American revivalism.” Evangelicalism emerged from the long-standing revivalist tradition in America. The core of this tradition is the complete submission of the believer to the influence of the preacher within the context of a believing audience. In the late 19th this tradition evolved into an era of the celebrity preacher who didn’t just preach at irregular intervals. He organized and directed followers beyond a local congregation. He told these followers what to think and how to act through a network, first of publications, then of broadcast media, and most recently, of course, the internet. All rely on a charismatic personality cult with a particular skill in fund-raising rather than theology. This was a new ‘system’ of religion: “This system encouraged personal empire-building which developed during Moody’s time... “It was a religion structured according to the free enterprise system.”*
————
Marsden all but admits that the these characteristics of the evangelical movement serve a primarily political purpose. “Respectable ‘evangelicals’ in the 1870s, by the 1920s had become a laughingstock, ideological strangers in their own land.” While this may be a shared feeling it is not yet political. But Marsden goes on: “The fundamentalists’ most alarming experience was that of finding themselves living in a culture that by the 1920s was openly turning away from God.” This is not personal; it is not even spiritual. It implies a straightforward political objective: not the salvation of souls but the re-formation of American society.
What is at stake for Evangelicals is a certain kind of politics, one that restores “the Biblical foundations of American civilization.” The Dispensationalists among them, the dominant political force, say openly that their objective is to prepare for the 1000-year reign of Jesus by establishing a culture ready to receive him, including a theocratic government. I don’t think it coincidental that this sounds remarkably like the last 1000-year Reich we are familiar with. A dangerous place this America.
————
*The Chicago preacher Dwight Moody was arguably the first of these celebrity evangelists. Interestingly he too had his Big Four issues at the turn of the 20th century: “(1) the theater, (2) disregard of the Sabbath, (3) Sunday newspapers, and (4) atheistic teachings, including evolution.” These were prosecuted with equal vigour to that employed on today’s Big Four. Let us hope with equal effect.
October 17, 2025
”Ever since its rise in the 1920s scholars has predicted the imminent demise of the movement. The Fundamentalist, to return the favor, have predicted the speedy end of the world.”
-Ernest Robert Sandeen
”A fundamentalist is an evangelical who is angry about something.”
-George Marsden
You don’t have to have been raised in fundamentalism (as I was) to be curious about the origins of this extreme, American religious movement. Ever since Ronald Reagan’s victorious 1980 presidential campaign, American fundamentalist have played an ever increasing role in American politics. Always on the front lines of the culture wars (no matter how ridiculous) vigorously pushing back on equal rights for women, vehemently opposing gay rights, gay marriage, and trans rights, standing shoulder to shoulder with the proponents of Lost Cause ideology, white privileged, and old fashioned patriarchy, American fundamentalist have carved out an immediately recognizable profile. In our present political moment they are counted among the most devoted followers of Trump’s authoritarian regime, among the loudest voices for book banning and whitewashing American history of everything that contradicts triumphant American mythology, and have graduated into full on Christian (white) Nationalism.
George Marsden wrote this classic history of American fundamentalism before they became a force in American politics. His original book was published in 1980, just as fundamentalism was re-emerging back onto the American public stage. He revised the book in 2005, adding a chapter to cover a quarter century of fundamentalism as a force in American politics, but that still was too early to foresee the full-on Christian Nationalism the movement has grown into.
Instead, this is a book about how several diverse strands of Protestantism (revivalism, pietism, dispensationalism) began to coalesce in the 19th century, powered by their reactions against theological modernism and Darwinism, to create what would eventually emerge as the fundamentalist movement. It traces that movement through the crisis points in the 20th century (World War I, the Scopes Trial) that firmly shaped its unique identity that is still recognizable today. Marsden captures the internal contradictions within the movement’s origin that provides both its creative tension and unique identity — how it is a movement powered both by respectability/belonging and outsider/dissenting, by both super patriotism and rejection of cultural norms. While Marsden’s book won’t bring you up to date with fundamentalisms most current and extreme incarnation, it is absolutely essential reading to understand the origins and thought processes of this most troubling of American religious extremisms.
-Ernest Robert Sandeen
”A fundamentalist is an evangelical who is angry about something.”
-George Marsden
You don’t have to have been raised in fundamentalism (as I was) to be curious about the origins of this extreme, American religious movement. Ever since Ronald Reagan’s victorious 1980 presidential campaign, American fundamentalist have played an ever increasing role in American politics. Always on the front lines of the culture wars (no matter how ridiculous) vigorously pushing back on equal rights for women, vehemently opposing gay rights, gay marriage, and trans rights, standing shoulder to shoulder with the proponents of Lost Cause ideology, white privileged, and old fashioned patriarchy, American fundamentalist have carved out an immediately recognizable profile. In our present political moment they are counted among the most devoted followers of Trump’s authoritarian regime, among the loudest voices for book banning and whitewashing American history of everything that contradicts triumphant American mythology, and have graduated into full on Christian (white) Nationalism.
George Marsden wrote this classic history of American fundamentalism before they became a force in American politics. His original book was published in 1980, just as fundamentalism was re-emerging back onto the American public stage. He revised the book in 2005, adding a chapter to cover a quarter century of fundamentalism as a force in American politics, but that still was too early to foresee the full-on Christian Nationalism the movement has grown into.
Instead, this is a book about how several diverse strands of Protestantism (revivalism, pietism, dispensationalism) began to coalesce in the 19th century, powered by their reactions against theological modernism and Darwinism, to create what would eventually emerge as the fundamentalist movement. It traces that movement through the crisis points in the 20th century (World War I, the Scopes Trial) that firmly shaped its unique identity that is still recognizable today. Marsden captures the internal contradictions within the movement’s origin that provides both its creative tension and unique identity — how it is a movement powered both by respectability/belonging and outsider/dissenting, by both super patriotism and rejection of cultural norms. While Marsden’s book won’t bring you up to date with fundamentalisms most current and extreme incarnation, it is absolutely essential reading to understand the origins and thought processes of this most troubling of American religious extremisms.
July 8, 2012
The thesis of this book parallels that of George Marsden's similar book on American culture, Religion and American Culture, that Fundamentalism shaped and was shaped by the surrounding culture. Marsden builds upon the work of earlier historians of Fundamentalism, namely that of Ernest Sandeen's book The Roots of Fundamentalism: British and American Millenarianism. Sandeen's thesis is that Fundamentalism is the outgrowth of the "millenarian" movement that developed in late nineteenth-century American, especially through Bible institutes and conferences concerning the interpretation of biblical prophecies. Sandeen's thesis, according to Marsden, has much to commend it in connecting millenarianism and Princeton theology to the movement; however, it does not deal adequately with the militant anti-modernistic slant of the movement. Fundamentalism can briefly be defined as militant anti-modernist Protestantism that took on its own identity as a patchwork coalition of representatives of other movements.
Overview of the Book
Marsden divides his book into three sections (these sections are different in intent than the above themes. Marsden uses these sections to expand on his themes), Evangelicalism before Fundamentalism, the Shaping of Fundamentalism as a Movement, and the Crucial Years in which it gained popularity and its subsequent exodus of public life. In understanding the rise of Fundamentalism at the end of the nineteenth-century one must understand the backdrop from which it arose-nineteenth-century evangelicalism.
Conclusion
Marsden concludes the book by re-emphasizing his definition of Fundamentalism as a militant anti-modernist conservative force. For Marsden this should be the starting point for defining the movement. Militant anti-modernism applies to all types of Fundamentalism and any definition that goes beyond this must have qualifiers so that false stereotypes are not applied to the wrong group. As an Evangelical I enjoyed this book as I saw where the mind-set of conservatives and liberals developed. I also learned to what extent my own beliefs were influenced by this movement. I suggest that this book be read alongside another book on the shaping of American Christianity for a full understanding. I would also like to see an analysis of Fundamentalism from a more mainline perspective, although I believe Marsden is objective in this work. My main qualm with this book is in Part Three. In discussing the peak and soon-to-come fall of Fundamentalism, Marsden tried to put too many ideas into too few words. To keep up with him I had to re-analyze several chapters. However, due to the length of the book already, I can understand his attempt to save space. I would recommend this book to people of all political and religious persuasions so that they may have a fair understanding of this branch of early twentieth-century American religion.
Overview of the Book
Marsden divides his book into three sections (these sections are different in intent than the above themes. Marsden uses these sections to expand on his themes), Evangelicalism before Fundamentalism, the Shaping of Fundamentalism as a Movement, and the Crucial Years in which it gained popularity and its subsequent exodus of public life. In understanding the rise of Fundamentalism at the end of the nineteenth-century one must understand the backdrop from which it arose-nineteenth-century evangelicalism.
Conclusion
Marsden concludes the book by re-emphasizing his definition of Fundamentalism as a militant anti-modernist conservative force. For Marsden this should be the starting point for defining the movement. Militant anti-modernism applies to all types of Fundamentalism and any definition that goes beyond this must have qualifiers so that false stereotypes are not applied to the wrong group. As an Evangelical I enjoyed this book as I saw where the mind-set of conservatives and liberals developed. I also learned to what extent my own beliefs were influenced by this movement. I suggest that this book be read alongside another book on the shaping of American Christianity for a full understanding. I would also like to see an analysis of Fundamentalism from a more mainline perspective, although I believe Marsden is objective in this work. My main qualm with this book is in Part Three. In discussing the peak and soon-to-come fall of Fundamentalism, Marsden tried to put too many ideas into too few words. To keep up with him I had to re-analyze several chapters. However, due to the length of the book already, I can understand his attempt to save space. I would recommend this book to people of all political and religious persuasions so that they may have a fair understanding of this branch of early twentieth-century American religion.
November 11, 2024
Wow. This book was incredibly helpful! Growing up in a church that was fundamentalistic, I struggled to connect my understanding of church growing up with the wider church in America. This book helped me connect some of the experiences and doctrines that I saw growing up with historical context and history of the church in America in general. Fundamentalism and American Culture is easily one of the best books I have read in 2024. I will be revisiting this book again in the future!
March 18, 2020
I completed a quick "inspectional" reading of most of this book, and a more in-depth reading of certain parts that were of particular interest to me. There is a reason that this volume sets the bar for recent scholarship on modern American Fundamentalism (and Christianity, more broadly). George Marsden has accomplished what many historians only hope to achieve: the production of a lucid, focused, useful, and authoritative book on a topic of continuing importance within the field.
Marsden wrote Fundamentalism and American Culture to address the question of how – if at all –culture influenced the fundamentalist expression of evangelical Christianity in America. The scope of Marsden’s project in this book is ambitious, as reflected in the definition of culture which he has adopted for his task. Marsden has defined culture as “the collection of beliefs, values, assumptions, commitments, and ideals expressed in a society through popular literary and artistic forms and embodied in its political, educational, and other institutions” (v). Marsden’s commitment to exploring the complex web of relationships between American Fundamentalism and various expressions of American culture makes this volume valuable. It is the opinion of this reviewer that Marsden has prosecuted his task with scholarly integrity and effectiveness.
Before considering Marsden’s thesis, it is important to lay out his definition of Fundamentalism. Marsden has succinctly and helpfully defined American Fundamentalism in the 1920s as “militantly anti-modernist Protestant evangelicalism” (4). Subsequent scholarship has adopted Marsden’s definition almost verbatim in some instances. For example, David Harrington Watt has defined the phenomenon in writing, “Fundamentalism, an interdenominational movement that coalesced in the second decade of the twentieth century, was a militantly antimodernist variety of evangelicalism.” In addition to being interdenominational in character, Fundamentalism bore strong ideological and theological dependence upon antecedent groups, and represented at-times surprising theological diversity. The uniting feature of the movement was its constituents’ strong opposition to theological modernism. In this sense, Marsden’s characterization is essentially negative, defined by the fundamentalists’ theological antagonists.
With the definitions of culture and Fundamentalism described above, Marsden’s thesis is not surprising. Marsden’s thesis can be summarized, crises in late-nineteenth and early-twentieth century American religious and intellectual life shaped developing evangelical theology and concerns in such a way so as to produce a new multi- and inter-denominational movement best described as Fundamentalism. Through the course of his monograph, Marsden highlights three themes: “the establishment-or-outsider paradox,” “the conflict between the pietist and the Calvinist traditions,” and “the tension between trust and distrust of the intellect” within Fundamentalism (7). As a historian, Marsden methodologically focuses on the individual level of analysis, relying most heavily upon profiles of prominent individuals and accounts of their lives to weave together a lucid narrative. His concern to describe Fundamentalism by means of accounting for its leaders’ activities and publications complements his briefer explorations of principal theological concerns and developments within and around the movement. The result is a careful examination of the formative influences on Fundamentalism, as well as a charitable – if not sympathetic – consideration of the concerns of the movement in its heyday.
Marsden wrote Fundamentalism and American Culture to address the question of how – if at all –culture influenced the fundamentalist expression of evangelical Christianity in America. The scope of Marsden’s project in this book is ambitious, as reflected in the definition of culture which he has adopted for his task. Marsden has defined culture as “the collection of beliefs, values, assumptions, commitments, and ideals expressed in a society through popular literary and artistic forms and embodied in its political, educational, and other institutions” (v). Marsden’s commitment to exploring the complex web of relationships between American Fundamentalism and various expressions of American culture makes this volume valuable. It is the opinion of this reviewer that Marsden has prosecuted his task with scholarly integrity and effectiveness.
Before considering Marsden’s thesis, it is important to lay out his definition of Fundamentalism. Marsden has succinctly and helpfully defined American Fundamentalism in the 1920s as “militantly anti-modernist Protestant evangelicalism” (4). Subsequent scholarship has adopted Marsden’s definition almost verbatim in some instances. For example, David Harrington Watt has defined the phenomenon in writing, “Fundamentalism, an interdenominational movement that coalesced in the second decade of the twentieth century, was a militantly antimodernist variety of evangelicalism.” In addition to being interdenominational in character, Fundamentalism bore strong ideological and theological dependence upon antecedent groups, and represented at-times surprising theological diversity. The uniting feature of the movement was its constituents’ strong opposition to theological modernism. In this sense, Marsden’s characterization is essentially negative, defined by the fundamentalists’ theological antagonists.
With the definitions of culture and Fundamentalism described above, Marsden’s thesis is not surprising. Marsden’s thesis can be summarized, crises in late-nineteenth and early-twentieth century American religious and intellectual life shaped developing evangelical theology and concerns in such a way so as to produce a new multi- and inter-denominational movement best described as Fundamentalism. Through the course of his monograph, Marsden highlights three themes: “the establishment-or-outsider paradox,” “the conflict between the pietist and the Calvinist traditions,” and “the tension between trust and distrust of the intellect” within Fundamentalism (7). As a historian, Marsden methodologically focuses on the individual level of analysis, relying most heavily upon profiles of prominent individuals and accounts of their lives to weave together a lucid narrative. His concern to describe Fundamentalism by means of accounting for its leaders’ activities and publications complements his briefer explorations of principal theological concerns and developments within and around the movement. The result is a careful examination of the formative influences on Fundamentalism, as well as a charitable – if not sympathetic – consideration of the concerns of the movement in its heyday.
February 17, 2017
Marsden's overview of Christianity in American culture starting in the mid 1800s and spanning thru the 1920s is one of the best books I have read so far on the subject. If you want to understand not only some of the controversies surrounding fundamentalism but how in the world we got to where we are now, this is a great place to start. From Pietism, to Revivalism, to the Holiness movement, to fundamentalism and then the 20th century fall out, Marsden covers it all. He also includes a helpful understanding of the cultural shift from a majority post-millennial belief to the popularity of dispensational/pre-millennial beliefs, as well as the political underpinnings of those movements. I definitely recommend this book, especially editions with the 2005 essay "Fundamentalism Yesterday and Today" for more follow up info on Christian trends in the 20th century.
April 25, 2025
I’ve been slowly listening to and digesting this one for a couple of months now. About a year ago, I was talking with a church member about how I grew up in an Independent Fundamental Baptist Church (that church’s self designation), and he said that he had as well. However, what we later found out was that we meant totally different things when we each said “Independent Fundamental.” He grew up in a KJV-only, red-in-the-face preacher Baptist church, while I grew up in a typical fairly conservative GARBC church - a far cry from this church member’s KJV-only upbringing. His question upon learning about this difference of meaning, “Why would your home church identify as Fundamentalist?,” sent me to this book, which turned out to be extremely helpful in shedding light on the history of Fundamentalism in America.
One of the gems from this book that has stuck with me is Marsden’s claim that the Fundamentalist approach to Scripture and theology is, fundamentally, Baconian. In this approach, Scripture is raw data that we must synthesize into discrete propositions. The Scriptures then become more of a puzzle to be solved than a mosaic to be beheld. This observation sheds light on many current discussions between fundamentalist-evangelical theologians and evangelical-Protestant theologians regarding Nicene theology and the Great Tradition.
This book also helped me to understand how Dispensational Premillennialism became a test of orthodoxy in many Fundamentalist-leaning circles, something which had always confused me given the difficulty of the subject matter and the variety of historical views held by excellent “conservative” theologians.
One of the gems from this book that has stuck with me is Marsden’s claim that the Fundamentalist approach to Scripture and theology is, fundamentally, Baconian. In this approach, Scripture is raw data that we must synthesize into discrete propositions. The Scriptures then become more of a puzzle to be solved than a mosaic to be beheld. This observation sheds light on many current discussions between fundamentalist-evangelical theologians and evangelical-Protestant theologians regarding Nicene theology and the Great Tradition.
This book also helped me to understand how Dispensational Premillennialism became a test of orthodoxy in many Fundamentalist-leaning circles, something which had always confused me given the difficulty of the subject matter and the variety of historical views held by excellent “conservative” theologians.
April 6, 2025
Excellent.
Marsden provides a thorough and impressive historical review of American fundamentalism and its evolution over time. His analysis is objective yet unflinching. He demonstrates how the movement began as a purely theological response to the encroachments of modernism, but over time became more aligned with particular socioeconomic groups and eventually politically conservative viewpoints.
Overall, this classic work is a must-read for those interested in the history of Christianity in the US.
Highly recommended.
Here are some good reviews:
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
Marsden provides a thorough and impressive historical review of American fundamentalism and its evolution over time. His analysis is objective yet unflinching. He demonstrates how the movement began as a purely theological response to the encroachments of modernism, but over time became more aligned with particular socioeconomic groups and eventually politically conservative viewpoints.
Overall, this classic work is a must-read for those interested in the history of Christianity in the US.
Highly recommended.
Here are some good reviews:
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
June 30, 2024
This is a must read
September 25, 2024
A very worthwhile read. His perception of the movements development, though supported with arguably anecdotal stories and historical accounts, feels thorough and honest. I can’t think of a more fruitful method of understanding a movement as complex as fundamentalism.
I also learned more about the Baptist and Presbyterian churches which was very interesting.
I also learned more about the Baptist and Presbyterian churches which was very interesting.
May 28, 2022
While I am neither a fundamentalist or a premillenarian, I found this a fascinating read. I love tracing the history of the premill movement through the last century. I don’t necessarily agree with some of his modern takes on fundamentalism, especially since the most recent part was written in 2005, but a very interesting read!
March 4, 2021
I don’t know why it took me this long, but this book along with Nathan Hatch’s The Democratization of American Christianity have been so helpful and instructive. As we’re observing further divides and re-sorting among evangelical believers, knowing our past is vital. It can be dizzying in the present, but looking backward can provide perspective. In the quote oft-attributed to Mark Twain, “History may not repeat itself. But it rhymes.”
Read
August 4, 2011The thesis of this book parallels that of George Marsden's similar book on American culture, Religion and American Culture, that Fundamentalism shaped and was shaped by the surrounding culture. Marsden builds upon the work of earlier historians of Fundamentalism, namely that of Ernest Sandeen's book The Roots of Fundamentalism: British and American Millenarianism. Sandeen's thesis is that Fundamentalism is the outgrowth of the "millenarian" movement that developed in late nineteenth-century American, especially through Bible institutes and conferences concerning the interpretation of biblical prophecies. Sandeen's thesis, according to Marsden, has much to commend it in connecting millenarianism and Princeton theology to the movement; however, it does not deal adequately with the militant anti-modernistic slant of the movement. Fundamentalism can briefly be defined as militant anti-modernist Protestantism that took on its own identity as a patchwork coalition of representatives of other movements.
Overview of the Book
Marsden divides his book into three sections (these sections are different in intent than the above themes. Marsden uses these sections to expand on his themes), Evangelicalism before Fundamentalism, the Shaping of Fundamentalism as a Movement, and the Crucial Years in which it gained popularity and its subsequent exodus of public life. In understanding the rise of Fundamentalism at the end of the nineteenth-century one must understand the backdrop from which it arose-nineteenth-century evangelicalism.
Conclusion
Marsden concludes the book by re-emphasizing his definition of Fundamentalism as a militant anti-modernist conservative force. For Marsden this should be the starting point for defining the movement. Militant anti-modernism applies to all types of Fundamentalism and any definition that goes beyond this must have qualifiers so that false stereotypes are not applied to the wrong group. As an Evangelical I enjoyed this book as I saw where the mind-set of conservatives and liberals developed. I also learned to what extent my own beliefs were influenced by this movement. I suggest that this book be read alongside another book on the shaping of American Christianity for a full understanding. I would also like to see an analysis of Fundamentalism from a more mainline perspective, although I believe Marsden is objective in this work. My main qualm with this book is in Part Three. In discussing the peak and soon-to-come fall of Fundamentalism, Marsden tried to put too many ideas into too few words. To keep up with him I had to re-analyze several chapters. However, due to the length of the book already, I can understand his attempt to save space. I would recommend this book to people of all political and religious persuasions so that they may have a fair understanding of this branch of early twentieth-century American religion.
Overview of the Book
Marsden divides his book into three sections (these sections are different in intent than the above themes. Marsden uses these sections to expand on his themes), Evangelicalism before Fundamentalism, the Shaping of Fundamentalism as a Movement, and the Crucial Years in which it gained popularity and its subsequent exodus of public life. In understanding the rise of Fundamentalism at the end of the nineteenth-century one must understand the backdrop from which it arose-nineteenth-century evangelicalism.
Conclusion
Marsden concludes the book by re-emphasizing his definition of Fundamentalism as a militant anti-modernist conservative force. For Marsden this should be the starting point for defining the movement. Militant anti-modernism applies to all types of Fundamentalism and any definition that goes beyond this must have qualifiers so that false stereotypes are not applied to the wrong group. As an Evangelical I enjoyed this book as I saw where the mind-set of conservatives and liberals developed. I also learned to what extent my own beliefs were influenced by this movement. I suggest that this book be read alongside another book on the shaping of American Christianity for a full understanding. I would also like to see an analysis of Fundamentalism from a more mainline perspective, although I believe Marsden is objective in this work. My main qualm with this book is in Part Three. In discussing the peak and soon-to-come fall of Fundamentalism, Marsden tried to put too many ideas into too few words. To keep up with him I had to re-analyze several chapters. However, due to the length of the book already, I can understand his attempt to save space. I would recommend this book to people of all political and religious persuasions so that they may have a fair understanding of this branch of early twentieth-century American religion.
March 16, 2021
4.7 Stars
Marsden's Fundamentalism and American Culture is a must read! This is not only for those who want to better understand the historical controversary of fundamentalism and liberalism - but also for those who wants to better understand the culture of our modern church. Marsden is an excellent writer to helps the reader to see some of the theological and cultural issues that drove the fundamentalist-controversary. This is a great book for anyone to read!
Marsden's Fundamentalism and American Culture is a must read! This is not only for those who want to better understand the historical controversary of fundamentalism and liberalism - but also for those who wants to better understand the culture of our modern church. Marsden is an excellent writer to helps the reader to see some of the theological and cultural issues that drove the fundamentalist-controversary. This is a great book for anyone to read!
April 22, 2015
A fundamental book for understanding American fundamentalism and, more broadly, American Christianity and its relationship to the broader culture. The original text covers mostly the period from 1870-1920s but the new expanded edition also offers insights into the evangelicalism and fundamentalism of the late 20th century.
November 15, 2022
Good overview of the development of Protestant Fundamentalism in the 19th and early 20th centuries (and the "re-fundamentalization" of American evangelicalism in the latter decades of the 20th century). A classic of modern church history.
From Marsden's conclusion: "In American church history many authors have pointed to the intertwining of Christianity with the various "isms" of the times—nationalism, socialism, individualism, liberalism, conservatism, scientism, subjectivism, common-sense objectivism, romanticism, relativism, cultural optimism, cultural pessimism, intellectualism, anti-intellectualism, self-ism, materialism, and so forth. Fundamentalism...incorporated some of these into its vision of Christianity. Yet God can certainly work through some such combinations. Christians' trust in God may be mingled or confused with some culturally formed assumptions, ideals, and values. Inevitably it will. The danger is that our culturally defined loves, allegiances, and understandings will overwhelm and take precedence over our faithfulness to God. So the identification of cultural forces, such as those with which this book is concerned, is essentially a constructive enterprise, with the positive purpose of finding the gold among he the dross."
From Marsden's conclusion: "In American church history many authors have pointed to the intertwining of Christianity with the various "isms" of the times—nationalism, socialism, individualism, liberalism, conservatism, scientism, subjectivism, common-sense objectivism, romanticism, relativism, cultural optimism, cultural pessimism, intellectualism, anti-intellectualism, self-ism, materialism, and so forth. Fundamentalism...incorporated some of these into its vision of Christianity. Yet God can certainly work through some such combinations. Christians' trust in God may be mingled or confused with some culturally formed assumptions, ideals, and values. Inevitably it will. The danger is that our culturally defined loves, allegiances, and understandings will overwhelm and take precedence over our faithfulness to God. So the identification of cultural forces, such as those with which this book is concerned, is essentially a constructive enterprise, with the positive purpose of finding the gold among he the dross."
April 12, 2025
It took me a while to appreciate this book and follow the authors style. He continually bounced back-and-forth in times and people and found it very difficult to follow. The second half I appreciated I appreciated it more,maybe because it was closer to my historical timeframe to understand. Overall, however, I Think I began to understand what fundamentalism is and how it affects so many Christian views.
September 1, 2024
Very good.
December 29, 2022
For the purpose of understanding the movement's origins and subsequent evolution to it's current form, this would be a valuable read for anyone who calls himself a fundamentalist. Marsden seems to offer a balanced perspective, discussing both the good and bad points of the movement, neither glorifying nor vilifying.
A frequently occuring theme throughout the book is the Fundamentalists struggle with what essentially amounts to a contradiction of identity - they simultaneously see themselves as the remnant of the true church, but also as the outlier opposition to the apostate church. In other words, are the Fundamentalists basically puritans fighting for the purification of the establishment church, or are they separatists fighting against the establishment church?
A frequently occuring theme throughout the book is the Fundamentalists struggle with what essentially amounts to a contradiction of identity - they simultaneously see themselves as the remnant of the true church, but also as the outlier opposition to the apostate church. In other words, are the Fundamentalists basically puritans fighting for the purification of the establishment church, or are they separatists fighting against the establishment church?
April 30, 2012
Like many scholarly works, this book suffers from a bit of wordiness and a certain hesitancy to create a "big picture" narrative for fear of leaving something out. That can be frustrating if you aren't familiar with the subject (the fundamentalist clash with Christian liberalism from 1870-1925), but despite these shortcomings, this book has a lot to offer. It's a fascinating slice of American history that Marsden covers, and his deep and scholarly understanding of Protestant Christianity in America makes him the ideal interpreter. Importantly, Marsden often lets the sources talk for themselves. The voices of early 20th century leaders such as J. Gresham Machen ("The church is perishing today for the lack of thinking, not through an excess of it") or William Jennings Bryan ("if we will try to live up to that which we can understand, we will be kept so busy doing good that we will not have time to worry about the things we do not understand"), come through loud and clear, and as a result the book portrays the clash between liberalism and fundamentalism as it appeared to Christians at the time. The themes of the controversy were sweepingly dramatic: intellectualism versus anti-intellectualism, science versus religion, education versus ignorance, absolute truth versus social adjustment. It may come as a surprise to some that the battleground has shifted little in the past hundred years. For those on either side of the religious/secular divide, an understanding of the conflict's past cannot help but prove invaluable to an understanding of its future.
July 15, 2024
(2020 review - 5) excellent, lucid work demonstrating the cultural and intellectual (philosophical and theological) forces that drove early fundamentalism (1875-1930), which remain extremely important for understanding American fundamentalism today. There are some shortcomings, some of which Marsden identified in the 2005 updated version (women don’t feature in this volume though they absolutely feature in the lifeblood of fundamentalism; he could have made fundamentalist hatred for the cultural and moral changes of the 1920s more explicit, though he takes that for granted). But it’s still an impressive work, holding up way better than your average historical book from 1980. his framework is also pretty strong with regard to the work of a Christian historian, though one of my hopes is to be able to add more theory to such frameworks, in order to better understand the forces that shape our world, including the manifold varieties of evangelicalism and fundamentalism in the last 70 years.
(2024 - 4)
(2024 - 4)
October 9, 2021
UPDATE 10/9/2021: One aspect of this book that is sorely lacking is basically any mention women or people of color in the fundamentalist movement. No Aimee Semple McPherson seems like a real oversight.
+++++++++
This is widely considered the primary resource for understanding the history of the Fundamentalist movement that had such a powerful effect on the American church in the early 20th century. It comes by the reputation honestly; Marsden does a good job showing how the various strands of antebellum revivalism, primitivism and Calvinism twined together and reacted against the broader shifts in American culture that took place especially after World War I. Marsden isn't necessarily writing for a popular audience; even so, I found him a little hard to follow at times, and his analysis at the end is a bit hit-or-miss. Regardless, definitely a book you should read if you're interested in how American Protestant went from Jonathan Edwards to the Scopes Trial.
+++++++++
This is widely considered the primary resource for understanding the history of the Fundamentalist movement that had such a powerful effect on the American church in the early 20th century. It comes by the reputation honestly; Marsden does a good job showing how the various strands of antebellum revivalism, primitivism and Calvinism twined together and reacted against the broader shifts in American culture that took place especially after World War I. Marsden isn't necessarily writing for a popular audience; even so, I found him a little hard to follow at times, and his analysis at the end is a bit hit-or-miss. Regardless, definitely a book you should read if you're interested in how American Protestant went from Jonathan Edwards to the Scopes Trial.
July 21, 2022
Note: This review has three sections: a methodological critism, a *significantly* heavier historical criticism summarizing racial violence from Reconstruction (1860-1880) to the Second Klan (1920s) to the Freedom Movement (1960s), and a summary.
Methodological Criticism
Making no mention of race in what is ostensibly a study of christian fundamentalism beginning from Reconstruction to the height of the Second Klan is so irresponsible as to be nearly unbelievable. It is no surprise, in this suspicious absence of race, that the author goes on to praise Billy Sunday—who worked to acquit the Klan and support their efforts—as *tolerant*. Likewise, sex and gender are almost completely overlooked, despite their extreme relevance to understanding *fundamentalism*.
The author started his research from idealism, tracing the exchange of ideas at a purely individual, Great Man level (he later claims his analysis had been a cultural one—despite a complete absence of any lenses used in cultural studies). There isn't a trace of suspicion in his hermeneutics, no critical analysis; if a Great Man says their movement isn't about violence, he believes them. In spite of the overwhelming history of violence in this timespan, as continues to persist today in these movements, directed at women, people of color, divergent sexualities and identities, and abortion clinics, he maintains his position that fundamentalists have been overwhelmingly nonviolent. He does this by methodically avoiding studying this violence, as evidenced by his sources. He set out to confirm his idea that fundamentalism is best understood in a lineage of theological ideas, and that is what he restricted his study to.
Perhaps it is best put by equating the author with William Jennings Bryan at the Scopes Trial:
Bryan: I do not think about things I don't think about.
Darrow: Do you think about things you do think about?
Bryan: Well, sometimes.
============
Heavy Historical Criticism
The Reconstruction era was filled with extreme violence, as white mobs overthrew entire towns and lynched with impunity to push their bigoted views backed by a racist and fundamentalist interpretation of the Biblical story of Ham as the origin of a race they considered subhuman. The force and ordinariness of these mobs was so great that it sparked a mass exodus of black people from the South, and completely overturned what has been called the Radical Reconstruction era (it is in this era the States gained public schools, libraries, and public jobs programs). It is during this period that policing and state prisons has its origins from Slave Patrols and religious Penitentuaries, as laws, prisons and chain gangs were created all over the country to control black labor. As W.E.B DuBois puts it, “The slave went free; stood a brief moment in the sun; then moved back again toward slavery.” This is a period in which the author argues fundamentalists were nonviolent and apolitical.
Lynchings continued in force as a major presence in society, unimpeded, unobjected to by politicians and most white folk for decades (this persists to some extent today, as Trayvon Martin, Armaud Arbery and George Floyd attest). This was to such an extent that crowds of white people would gleefully pose for photos in front of the bodies of lynching victims—fearing no repercussions whatsoever (Abel Meerepol's Strange Fruit, 1937, is about one such photo). By the time of the Second Klan in 1920, these were being openly and successfully justified by racial stereotyping of black people as serial rapists. There was a major overlap with fundamentalism, "tolerant" Billy Sunday himself being an outspoken supporter of the Klan. The Klan had always justified its actions with fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible, including the interpretation of 'scripture alone', and was violently anti-evolution, anti-modernist, and anti-social gospel, in direct contradiction to the author's statement, which is intended to separate the Klan from its fundamentalist interpretations of scripture. They and other fundamentalists in this period were neither apolitical nor nonviolent as the author claims, but engaged in a society-wide political project of disenfranchising and intimidating black voters.
Fast forward to the 1960s, and we see white mobs again enacting violence, intimidation, and lynchings against black people. Martin Luther King Jr, as James Cone points out in the Cross and the Lynching Tree, was so inundated with death threats that he would joke with his fellow organizers about his own death, and accepted its inevitability. When schools were desgregated, at least in law, the first black students to be bussed in had to do so under the protection of the National Guard, so great was the violence heaped at them. Clashes with counter-protestors were common, fire hoses were used on children, police dogs were turned on people in grim echoes of lynching parties. Billy Graham, among the fundamentalists referenced in this book, was himself a segregationist, stating after King's 'I Have a Dream' speech that “Only when Christ comes again will the little white children of Alabama walk hand in hand with little black children”. Again, fundamentalists in this era were staunchly political and violent, and again the author paints the roses red.
==========
Summary
It is difficult to believe that Marsden could be so willfully ignorant to racial violence in the fundamentalist traditions so as to rewrite history in such a blatantly colorblind way. The historical evidence so strongly contradicts his repeated claims to apolitical, non-violent christian fundamentalism as to be almost laughable in historical scholarship, were it not so grim. Whether Marsden is intentionally whitewashing this history, or doing so completely ignorant to the most foundational and ongoing racial violence of this country's history, his work here is disgustingly damaging. I have never seen a worse attempt at historical scholarship.
Methodological Criticism
Making no mention of race in what is ostensibly a study of christian fundamentalism beginning from Reconstruction to the height of the Second Klan is so irresponsible as to be nearly unbelievable. It is no surprise, in this suspicious absence of race, that the author goes on to praise Billy Sunday—who worked to acquit the Klan and support their efforts—as *tolerant*. Likewise, sex and gender are almost completely overlooked, despite their extreme relevance to understanding *fundamentalism*.
The author started his research from idealism, tracing the exchange of ideas at a purely individual, Great Man level (he later claims his analysis had been a cultural one—despite a complete absence of any lenses used in cultural studies). There isn't a trace of suspicion in his hermeneutics, no critical analysis; if a Great Man says their movement isn't about violence, he believes them. In spite of the overwhelming history of violence in this timespan, as continues to persist today in these movements, directed at women, people of color, divergent sexualities and identities, and abortion clinics, he maintains his position that fundamentalists have been overwhelmingly nonviolent. He does this by methodically avoiding studying this violence, as evidenced by his sources. He set out to confirm his idea that fundamentalism is best understood in a lineage of theological ideas, and that is what he restricted his study to.
Perhaps it is best put by equating the author with William Jennings Bryan at the Scopes Trial:
Bryan: I do not think about things I don't think about.
Darrow: Do you think about things you do think about?
Bryan: Well, sometimes.
============
Heavy Historical Criticism
The Reconstruction era was filled with extreme violence, as white mobs overthrew entire towns and lynched with impunity to push their bigoted views backed by a racist and fundamentalist interpretation of the Biblical story of Ham as the origin of a race they considered subhuman. The force and ordinariness of these mobs was so great that it sparked a mass exodus of black people from the South, and completely overturned what has been called the Radical Reconstruction era (it is in this era the States gained public schools, libraries, and public jobs programs). It is during this period that policing and state prisons has its origins from Slave Patrols and religious Penitentuaries, as laws, prisons and chain gangs were created all over the country to control black labor. As W.E.B DuBois puts it, “The slave went free; stood a brief moment in the sun; then moved back again toward slavery.” This is a period in which the author argues fundamentalists were nonviolent and apolitical.
Lynchings continued in force as a major presence in society, unimpeded, unobjected to by politicians and most white folk for decades (this persists to some extent today, as Trayvon Martin, Armaud Arbery and George Floyd attest). This was to such an extent that crowds of white people would gleefully pose for photos in front of the bodies of lynching victims—fearing no repercussions whatsoever (Abel Meerepol's Strange Fruit, 1937, is about one such photo). By the time of the Second Klan in 1920, these were being openly and successfully justified by racial stereotyping of black people as serial rapists. There was a major overlap with fundamentalism, "tolerant" Billy Sunday himself being an outspoken supporter of the Klan. The Klan had always justified its actions with fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible, including the interpretation of 'scripture alone', and was violently anti-evolution, anti-modernist, and anti-social gospel, in direct contradiction to the author's statement, which is intended to separate the Klan from its fundamentalist interpretations of scripture. They and other fundamentalists in this period were neither apolitical nor nonviolent as the author claims, but engaged in a society-wide political project of disenfranchising and intimidating black voters.
Fast forward to the 1960s, and we see white mobs again enacting violence, intimidation, and lynchings against black people. Martin Luther King Jr, as James Cone points out in the Cross and the Lynching Tree, was so inundated with death threats that he would joke with his fellow organizers about his own death, and accepted its inevitability. When schools were desgregated, at least in law, the first black students to be bussed in had to do so under the protection of the National Guard, so great was the violence heaped at them. Clashes with counter-protestors were common, fire hoses were used on children, police dogs were turned on people in grim echoes of lynching parties. Billy Graham, among the fundamentalists referenced in this book, was himself a segregationist, stating after King's 'I Have a Dream' speech that “Only when Christ comes again will the little white children of Alabama walk hand in hand with little black children”. Again, fundamentalists in this era were staunchly political and violent, and again the author paints the roses red.
==========
Summary
It is difficult to believe that Marsden could be so willfully ignorant to racial violence in the fundamentalist traditions so as to rewrite history in such a blatantly colorblind way. The historical evidence so strongly contradicts his repeated claims to apolitical, non-violent christian fundamentalism as to be almost laughable in historical scholarship, were it not so grim. Whether Marsden is intentionally whitewashing this history, or doing so completely ignorant to the most foundational and ongoing racial violence of this country's history, his work here is disgustingly damaging. I have never seen a worse attempt at historical scholarship.
December 21, 2011
In Fundamentalism and American Culture, Marsden explores the influences of the fundamentalist movement. The author believes that Ernest Sandeen overstates his case, that fundamentalism is an outgrowth of the millenarian movement. With a much wider root system, fundamentalism was a militant evangelical movement that was fighting battles on two fronts. 1) They fought against theological liberalism as it made its way into mainline denominations. 2) They were opposing the alarming changes in the culture.
This book is a good explanation of the roots of fundamentalism.
CB
This book is a good explanation of the roots of fundamentalism.
CB
November 18, 2019
"Fundamentalism is disastrously destructive because it is an inhibition of the very human impulse to understand, a closure of the process of education, a betrayal of the capacity that human beings have to think and act together. It is wrong because it tries to stop not just thought, but the society which makes thought possible."
---Black Oxford
---Black Oxford
September 3, 2014
Fantastic.
February 11, 2016
Important book for Recovering Fundamentalists...and Evangelicals.
October 12, 2022
If you're interested in better understanding the roots of the fundamentalism we've been experiencing the last several years and you'd like to hear it from a scholar, this is a very helpful book. George Marsden is currently a professor at Notre Dame and got his PhD from Yale. Following is not so much a review of the book but rather a few of my musings after reading it.
Marsden generally defines a "fundamentalist" as an evangelical who's angry about something; one who is more militant. He traces the development back to the second half of the 19th century and explores that period through the 1920s.
I've not read Mark Noll's *The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind* but my understanding is that he provides a blistering critique of the intellectual life of evangelicalism. I doubt Marsden would disagree. To be honest, Marsden's rendering of the history of much of post-Civil War evangelicalism is embarrassing. And over the last 6-7 years evangelicalism is reaping what has been sown and the harvest is conspiracy thinking, anti-intellectualism, a blind eye to corruption, etc. And they are frequently angry about something.
Among the worst offenders, IMO, are dispensationalism and pre-mil eschatology, the anti-science of early 20th century fundamentalism, the binaryism of the religious right and it's mixture of politics and religion, a fixation on Israel, Hal Lindsay, Tim Lahaye and *Left Behind*, and, of course, the culture war.
According to Marsden, a major issue for fundamentalists is their inability to accept, adapt and engage with pluralism in a healthy fashion.
The playbook for fundamentalists is to express alarm at the impact of the world on Christian culture and the country. The playbook must also have an enemy, e.g. secularism, evolution, communism, Russia, Jews, Nazis.
Evangelicals' track record of predicting the future would be laughable were it not taken so seriously.
There was a time, around the turn of the 20th century, when evangelicals combined gospel/Bible teaching with social action, but seemed to walk away from it when social action became more identified with progressive politics and the liberal social gospel.
Marsden indicates that he personally was influenced by Jonathan Edwards and Reinhold Niebuhr in the way he understands how Christians should engage with culture.
Marsden generally defines a "fundamentalist" as an evangelical who's angry about something; one who is more militant. He traces the development back to the second half of the 19th century and explores that period through the 1920s.
I've not read Mark Noll's *The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind* but my understanding is that he provides a blistering critique of the intellectual life of evangelicalism. I doubt Marsden would disagree. To be honest, Marsden's rendering of the history of much of post-Civil War evangelicalism is embarrassing. And over the last 6-7 years evangelicalism is reaping what has been sown and the harvest is conspiracy thinking, anti-intellectualism, a blind eye to corruption, etc. And they are frequently angry about something.
Among the worst offenders, IMO, are dispensationalism and pre-mil eschatology, the anti-science of early 20th century fundamentalism, the binaryism of the religious right and it's mixture of politics and religion, a fixation on Israel, Hal Lindsay, Tim Lahaye and *Left Behind*, and, of course, the culture war.
According to Marsden, a major issue for fundamentalists is their inability to accept, adapt and engage with pluralism in a healthy fashion.
The playbook for fundamentalists is to express alarm at the impact of the world on Christian culture and the country. The playbook must also have an enemy, e.g. secularism, evolution, communism, Russia, Jews, Nazis.
Evangelicals' track record of predicting the future would be laughable were it not taken so seriously.
There was a time, around the turn of the 20th century, when evangelicals combined gospel/Bible teaching with social action, but seemed to walk away from it when social action became more identified with progressive politics and the liberal social gospel.
Marsden indicates that he personally was influenced by Jonathan Edwards and Reinhold Niebuhr in the way he understands how Christians should engage with culture.
May 24, 2024
A rather bland history of the development of fundamentalism. Marsden seems to have settled for the level of historical analysis where he accurately addresses causes, never going deeper to answer the question of what this MEANS and its relevance to modern evangelicalism (other than telling us where it came from).
While churches of Christ were a little too far out of the mainstream to be fully a part of fundamentalism, a lot of this sounds very familiar. The pessimistic view of broader culture, academia, and liberalism. The language of “our nation/culture/way of life is at stake/under attack.” The embrace of outsider status. The focus on evolution as a mark of unorthodoxy and insistence on making science and religion clash. The battles over inerrancy and harmonization. And especially the common sense philosophy that says that regular people can read the Bible for themselves, understand it, and if they don’t then their hearts are not right. All of these are the air I breathe.
While churches of Christ were a little too far out of the mainstream to be fully a part of fundamentalism, a lot of this sounds very familiar. The pessimistic view of broader culture, academia, and liberalism. The language of “our nation/culture/way of life is at stake/under attack.” The embrace of outsider status. The focus on evolution as a mark of unorthodoxy and insistence on making science and religion clash. The battles over inerrancy and harmonization. And especially the common sense philosophy that says that regular people can read the Bible for themselves, understand it, and if they don’t then their hearts are not right. All of these are the air I breathe.
July 29, 2019
George Marsden first published this book in 1980, but when the book was republished in 2005, he wrote an additional chapter discussing the development of fundamentalism over the preceding twenty-five years, when fundamentalism became a crucial influence on American politics in a way Marsden did not predict 25 years earlier. The bulk of the book may have been swamped in discussion of what the dean of the Princeton School of Theology thought about post-millenarianism etc, etc , but the concluding chapter of the original edition was a cogent and perceptive discussion of the historical and theological milieu in the US which provided fertile ground for fundamentalism, and his 2005 essay was also excellent.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 110 reviews