Will the real fundamentalists please stand up?

The terms fundamentalist and fundamentalism originally referred to a particular movement of conservative Protestants in early 20th-century America. But in recent decades, they have been frequently applied far beyond this context.

This shift raises multiple questions. Is it appropriate to use the term fundamentalist to describe Jews in the haredim movement, or conservative Catholics who prefer the Latin Tridentine Mass, or proponents of Hindutva (“Hinduness”) in India? Since Muslims view the Holy Qur’an as the Word of God, is it proper to view all Muslims as fundamentalists—or should one apply this term only to some Muslims, or to none? Can the term fundamentalist be accurately applied to historical figures, as James Simpson does to 16th-century English Reformers in his book Burning to Read? Moving further back in time, do we gain insight if we apply the term to perspectives in the New Testament, as in William R. G. Loader’s description of Jesus’ alleged rejection of “the fundamentalism of his day, which was obsessed with literal fulfillment”?

Even if we confine our focus to the United States alone, the significance of the term fundamentalist can be elusive, particularly regarding its relation (or lack thereof) to evangelical Christianity. George M. Marsden famously described a fundamentalist as “an evangelical who is angry about something” and noted that Jerry Falwell had accepted this description. More recently, however, Timothy Kelly has puzzled over the shifting meaning of his self-description as an evangelical in relationship to fundamentalism. “When I used the word [evangelical] to describe myself in the 1970s, it meant I was not a fundamentalist. If I use the name today, however, it means to hearers that I am” (New Yorker, December 19, 2017).