Talking to a Fundamentalist
Telling them about mysticism may be more complicated than you think
A reader of Read the Bible Like a Mystic asked me a deceptively simple question.
“How do I talk about mysticism and contemplation to the fundamentalists in my life?”
Deceptively simple, yes. But actually quite a big question. And quite an important one. Where I live (in the American south), there are a lot of fundamentalists. But it’s not just a southern thing. I have spoken with friends from sea to shining sea, from red states and blue states, from Minnesota to Arizona, from Connecticut to Hawaii, and it seems that, at least in America, fundamentalists are everywhere.
I have fundamentalist relatives and in-laws; fundamentalist neighbors, and fundamentalists I encounter in my professional life. And I suspect many people who read my Substack could say the same.
If you haven’t already done so, please subscribe to my Mystical Journey newsletter: devotional writings grounded in mystical and contemplative spirituality. Click here: www.anamchara.net.
I don’t know that the Pew Research Center or anyone else like them has done a study of how many fundamentalist Christians there are in the USA versus how many contemplative Christians. But Pew estimates about 60 million Americans are conservative evangelicals; meanwhile, the Center for Action and Contemplation’s daily email goes out to less than 1 million people (380,875 daily readers and 425,656 weekly readers, according to their 2023 annual report). Even if subscribers to the CAC newsletter represent only about 10% of the contemplatives in America, I think it’s reasonable to assume that fundamentalists outnumber contemplatives of at least a factor of 7 to 1 (and my hunch is that the ratio could be much higher in the fundamentalists’s favor).
All this to say: if you are a Christian contemplative, chances are that you have fundamentalists in your life. And if they are there, sooner or later you will talk to them about spirituality and faith. Here’s the question: how do we do that in a way that is respectful of them, while being true to our beliefs?
The Problem with Fundamentalists
In Read the Bible Like a Mystic, I offer a simplistic understanding of fundamentalism, for the purpose of contrasting fundamentalist ways of reading the Bible with scholarly or contemplative approaches. I equate fundamentalism with an authoritarian approach to faith (and Bible study). Here’s a bit of what I had to say:
Authoritarian (or fundamentalist or “true believer”) readers think that the Bible should be literally understood as the inerrant word of God, as if the Spirit were whispering God’s thoughts into the minds of the biblical writers… Authoritarians have a very hierarchical understanding of God and how the world works; in this way of seeing things, the Bible has absolute and supreme authority because of its status as the unquestionable word of the supreme deity. Our job is not to critique it or try to interpret it in the light of science or other branches of human knowledge but to submissively conform our lives to its demands. Many fundamentalists insist there is no point in interpreting the Bible; you should just look for the “plain meaning” of the text, although… when these true believers talk about the “plain meaning” of Scripture, they really mean there’s only one acceptable way of reading the Bible: their way.
Fundamentalism is a form of spirituality that typically is hierarchical, authoritarian, structured around the psychology of dominance and submission, and literalistic (although even fundamentalists understand that you can’t interpret every single verse of the Bible literally, so fundamentalist literalism is really a code word for “our way is the only right way”).
What this means, is that if you want to have a dialogue with a fundamentalist Christian about interpreting the Bible in non-fundamentalist ways, you not only have to have a conversation about principles of Bible study and interpretation, but you also have to look at questions about the nature of the Bible’s authority, about whether God insists that all human beings submit to his dominance, and so forth.
In other words, there are complex social, psychological, and even political values that are at work in the mind of fundamentalist Christians: values that often may be unconsciously embedded in how they view the world, and therefore are simply not up for debate or discussion.
Without taking those complex and often subconscious values and views to account, we are not likely to have much satisfaction when we simply try to explain to our fundamentalist friends or loved ones that there are more ways to read and interpret scripture than what they hold to be true.
Political Extremism, a Clue to Understanding Fundamentalism
To help us understand the mind of the fundamentalist, I’d like to borrow a page from an article I read on Substack recently about the psychology of political extremism: “The Extremes Aren’t Opposites — They’re Twins” by Trygve Olson, a political consultant who writes the “Searching For Hope” column on Substack, although this particular post was published by the Lincoln Square Substack.
Olson is pointing out that extremists on the political left and political right often exhibit similar psychological traits, even if the values and issues they are passionate about couldn’t be more dissimilar. Following years of his own work and research, and drawing largely from the research of Dutch academics Jan-Willem van Prooijen and André P. M. Krouwel, Olson summarizes four traits common to political extremists, regardless of where they fall on the left-right spectrum:
Extremists crave certainty as a way to manage their own psychological distress, which arises out of feelings of fear and powerlessness;
Extremists exhibit cognitive simplicity in which they are only capable of, or willing to, see the world in dualistic, black-white terms, with clear ways of distinguishing between the “good guys” and the “bad guys”;
Extremists are invested in the superiority of rightness of their own beliefs; in the worlds of Olson, “They reject disagreement not because it’s wrong, but because it’s threatening”;
Extremists reject pluralism, regarding intolerance as a virtue since it is a way they maintain loyalty to their view, even though it means rejecting all other views as not just wrong, but dangerous, and perhaps even evil.
An addiction to certainty and simplicity; dualistic thinking regarded as the only possible “truth” or “correct way” of seeing things, and rejecting all other views as not just wrong, but demonic.
Why do I turn to political extremism to help me understand fundamentalists? I think it’s reasonable to regard fundamentalism as a type of theological extremism: perhaps more oriented toward God than government, but exhibiting the same qualities that drive extremist politics (this may help us to understand why so many Christian fundamentalists are so loyal to Trump: their extremist way of seeing the world is adaptable to both religious and political contexts).
If a person whose mind is structured this way attacks your spirituality or your way of reading and understanding the Bible, they are not interested in a friendly dialogue. They either want to convert you, or to reject you. There is no other option.
Contemplation has a Context — and so does Fundamentalism
Kenneth Leech, the English theologian and spiritual director who in many ways was a British precursor to Richard Rohr, once famously wrote “contemplation has a context,” meaning that the political and social realities of our life cannot help but shape the way we experience contemplation — and likewise, that an authentic contemplative practice will shape and transform how we meet the realities of our time.
But if contemplation has a context, fundamentalism has a context too. You can’t isolate out a literal way of reading the Bible apart from the extremist mindset that gives fundamentalism its foundation. If you remove the idolatry of certainty, the dualism, the insistence on there only being one correct “truth” in our faith, then fundamentalist stops making sense. But as long as the heirarchy, authoritarianism, literal-mindedness, and theology of dominance and submission are in place, then fundamentalism makes sense at least to the true believers.
If you have ever taken a painting to a frame shop to get it framed, you know that different frames can radically change how we see or experience the same work of art. A minimalistic metal frame gives a painting an entirely different “setting” (context) than an ornate gold-painted wooden frame.
Back in 2015, there was a kerfuffle online because an image of a dress was circulated that some people perceived as white and gold, others as blue and black. The actual dress was blue and black, but not everyone could see it; it became such a popular internet meme that to this day “the dress” has its own Wikipedia page. Acknowledging that “there is no consensus on why the dress elicits such discordant perceptions,” the page offers this tentative explanation:
Neuroscientists Bevil Conway and Jay Neitz believe they are a result of how the human brain perceives colour and chromatic adaptation. Conway believes it is connected to how the brain processes the various hues of a daylight sky: “Your visual system is looking at this thing, and you’re trying to discount the chromatic bias of the daylight axis ... people either discount the blue side, in which case they end up seeing white and gold, or discount the gold side, in which case they end up with blue and black.”
In other words, if you have the kind of eyes that are better suited at filtering out the blue, you see the dress as white and gold. Otherwise, you see it as blue and black.
Even something as simple as ambient light can dramatically change our perception. Here’s the original image of the famous dress (on the left), alongside an image posted on Reddit of a woman wearing that dress standing in partial sunlight. Where the sun shone directly on the dress, it looks white and gold, but otherwise the dress’s actual color is more readily visible.
See where I’m going? The fundamentalist insistence on reading the Bible literally is just one element of an overall worldview — a worldview that is usually embedded in an authoritarian mindset, concrete ways of thinking, and a patriarchal image of God. Because of this contextual way of seeing, the fundamentalist approach to interpreting the Bible (and thinking about God) proves to be simply foreign to non-fundamentalists (including contemplatives). Like the dress or that painting that looks radically different in different frames: the Bible looks different based on how it is “framed” — theologically, hermeneutically, spiritually. But as the dress meme helps us to see, we cannot rely on the “plain meaning of scripture” because that simply doesn’t exist. Your plain meaning does not look like my plain meaning! And this is just as true from the contemplative view of things as from the fundamentalist view. We cannot hope for consensus with fundamentalists, since their view of the world is so radically different from ours.
So How Do We Talk to Fundamentalists?
How I wish I had a snappy answer to that question; but I don’t. As best I can tell, there is no simple formula, no “Six Easy Steps to Help Fundamentalists Understand the Contemplative Way of Seeing.” But recently I had a conversation with my Patreon donors about contemplative dialogue with fundamentalists, and here is what I came up with:
Avoid Arguments and Debates. I know this is easier said than done, especially when the person involved is a close friend or family member. Remember that the culture of fundamentalism places a high priority of “witnessing” and “apologetics” — defending their faith against criticism and seeking to convert others to their way of seeing. Even if you believe the fundamentalist worldview is limited, naive, and ultimately irrational, don’t underestimate the effort that some fundamentalists will invest into finding ways to refute all criticism. Is it really going to help your relationship with this person to get into a quarrel (or worse, a shouting match) to try to prove who’s right and who’s wrong? Save your relationship — and your blood pressure. Hold fast to a commitment that “we must agree to disagree.”
Be the Adult in the Room. Some people love to debate and argue about almost anything: sports, politics, Star Wars vs. Star Trek, etc. Some of these spirited disputations can be held in good fun, but often religion and spirituality is so intimate in people’s lives that it’s almost impossible to discuss dispassionately. If you have a fundamentalist associate who keeps trying to goad you into a debate, it’s up to you to hold your boundaries. Remember, they are operating from a radically different worldview than yours. Treat your fundamentalist associates with dignity and respect: don’t shame or blame, but do be consistent in upholding your limits.
Affirm common values and interests. You and the fundamentalist probably have such radically different ways of seeing things that if you base your relationship just on religion or spirituality, the entire relationship might be at risk. Americans (and Christians in general) need to learn how to preserve relationships with people who we disagree with, so here’s a chance to work on that! And one way to preserve a relationship is to focus on what you do share in common. It may have nothing to do with faith, but that’s okay. If the only things you and your fundamentalist cousin can talk about is cats and baseball, then that’s going to be the nature of your relationship with them, at least for the time being.
Use “I statements” — avoid attacking/belittling. When having a conversation with someone who sees the world radically differently than you do, it’s important to keep the quality of your interactions positive and compassionate. It’s a classic principle of small group dynamics (and contemplative dialogue) to speak using only “I statements” — say “I prefer to watch Star Trek” instead of “You and all your Star Wars buddies are idiots.” It’s tempting to resort to insults, attacks, subtle (or not-so-subtle) forms of verbal aggression, when interacting with a person whose values are so foreign from our own. But such attacks and insults never help. They erode whatever goodwill might exist between the parties, and make a future relationship based on trust and kindness that much harder to maintain. Own your own beliefs and views, but don’t shore them up by attacking others.
Be willing to say “I see things differently.” I learned this magic phrase from Brian D. McLaren and Bart Campolo, when they gave a workshop on having challenging conversations at the 2017 Wild Goose Festival. During the Q&A, someone asked Brian how to respond when someone makes a statement that we strongly disagree with. Again, the goal here is to try to preserve whatever relationship is in place. So if your brother insists on saying “the Bible tells us that nonbelievers are going to hell,” we may feel that it is necessary to respond — but how can we do that in a way that avoids just attacking the other person? Building on the “Use I statements” principle, frame your refutation of the other person’s statement with these four simple words: “I see things differently.” For example, “I see things differently, trusting that God’s love and compassion is more important than a narrow interpretation of scripture.” Don’t expect to win any arguments with this line, but it can at least be a relatively non-threatening way to introduce the values that are important to you.
Don’t take it personally! The fundamentalists in your life hold views you find objectionable. They may come across as sexist, homophobic, and bigoted. They refuse to show any interest in the wisdom of Christian mystics, let alone the great contemplatives of other traditions. Remember: this isn’t about you. It’s consistent with their deeply authoritarian, hierarchical and patriarchal worldview. Even if they are attacking you directly, what they are really doing is expressing the pain of their stifling philosophy. You cannot fix that for them, and you are not responsible for it. It may be hard to do, but remembering not to take their aggression personally may be necessary for preserving a relationship with them.
Be discerning about having a friendly conversation/dialogue. I’m serious in my belief that refusing to engage in debates or arguments with fundamentalists is necessary if you want to find some way to get along with them or maintain some sort of a relationship… but what if the fundamentalist person in your life is sincerely asking questions about your way of seeing things? Let’s face it, there are a lot of us who are former fundamentalists, and so it’s always possible that the fundamentalist you know and love might be ready to begin what in the evangelical world is called “deconstructing” — like French philosophers who deconstruct the status quo meaning of literature, a deconstructing fundamentalist is someone who is dismantling the limiting beliefs that up until now they have held onto tightly. A person in this place in their spiritual journey needs a kind, compassionate, nonjudgemental friend or loved one to help them wrestle with the ways that their previous world-view no longer works for them. Even if they have a tendency to get argumentative (force of habit), the deconstructing fundamentalist wants and deserves a friendly dialogue with someone who can show them a safe and meaningful path forward. This situation, to me, is the only time when it makes sense to wade into the swamp with a fundamentalist — although my others rules still apply (be kind, use I statements, etc.). This requires careful discernment. It’s not always easy to tell if a person is genuinely beginning to deconstruct their fundamentalism, or just trying bait you into a quarrel. I tend to err on the side of caution: so a person practically has to beg me to be a dialog partner on exiting fundamentalism before I’ll go there with them. But it’s important to remember that fundamentalists sometimes do grow beyond their too-confining boxes, and if we can help them with that, we are a true friend/loved one indeed.
Taking Good Care of Ourselves
Finally, here are a few principles that don't apply directly to your interactions with fundamentalists, but that are important for keeping your own faith healthy.
Follow Jesus. Yes, fundamentalists are all about following Jesus, but often their way of thinking about Jesus is so authoritarian and hierarchical that it doesn’t look anything like what Jesus really talked about. What does it mean to follow Jesus? It means being merciful, being loving and nonjudgmental, being quick to forgive and to forgive repeatedly, and never losing faith in God’s love and desire to bring us healing and reconciliation. As contemplatives we don’t have to talk about our faith, but it’s sure lovely when we quietly live it. As the saying that gets attributed to St. Francis of Assisi puts it: “Preach the gospel at all times, but only use words when absolutely necessary!”
Be faithful to contemplative practice. If contemplative spirituality matters to you, don’t market it to others, but do live it as faithfully as you can. Be diligent in practicing Centering Prayer or a similar silent prayer practice, each and every day (twice a day is best). Find, and meet regularly with, a contemplative spiritual director. Read the writings of the great mystics and contemplative writers. Participate in a Centering Prayer group or similar contemplative community. Go on a silent retreat at least once a year. Explore contemplative practices like lectio divina or the Examen or Ignatian imaginative prayer. Make contemplative practice a stable and daily part of your spiritual life. You will grow as a contemplative, which means you will grow in compassion, kindness, and a more enlightened way of seeing things.
Seek out friendship and support from others contemplatives. I mentioned this in the last bullet point, but it bears repeating: meet with a spiritual director, join a Centering Prayer group, participate in online groups dedicated to contemplative practice. Knowing that you have contemplative friends with whom you can be fully yourself is a great way to fortify yourself for those interactions with the fundamentalists who simply may not be able to appreciate who you truly are. It’s okay to be guarded and armored when interacting with fundamentalists, but everyone needs a community that is safe and supportive. And keep in mind, the contemplatives who become part of your community may not even practice the same religion you do: and that’s okay. Contemplation runs deep within all positive spiritual traditions, so look for that contemplative quality, no matter what religious identity the person might carry on their surface.
It saddens me that I cannot fully share the depth and beauty of my contemplative faith with the fundamentalists in my life, especially the ones that I’m related to, by blood or bond. But Jesus is pretty clear that we are called to love everybody. The love you may give to an enemy is not going to look like the love you share with a cherished neighbor. Likewise, the way we love fundamentalists will be different from the way we love other contemplatives. That’s okay. But the key here is to keep loving, as appropriately as necessary, with boundaries to keep everyone safe but also anchored in a trust in the God who is the source of all love. When I love myself, or my neighbor, or even my enemy (or the fundamentalists in my life), it is through that love that I am sharing my faith and my trust in God with them. That’s what matters. I can’t control how others will receive or respond to my love. But I can continue to love. That, it seems to me, is what matters the most.
