One author, apparently a devout Catholic, wrote that “Despite what you say, I'm not convinced that LaHaye and Jenkins are anti-Catholic. . .” He then asked me: “Are you an anti-fundamentalist?” It’s a good question and it deserves an answer. The answer is “Yes” – which requires some explanation.
I was raised in an anti-Catholic Fundamentalist home and I later attended an Evangelical Bible college. I would today, as a Catholic, consider myself to be anti-Fundamentalist and pro-Evangelical. However, that rests on my criteria (which I believe is implicitly shared by many Catholics and Protestants) for defining these two rather hazy groups. Simply put, I define Fundamentalists as conservative Protestants who believe Catholics are not Christian, while Evangelicals are conservative Protestants who, while having reservations about certain points of doctrine, do believe Catholics are Christian. If those definitions seem too simple or glib, please consider my logic.
There is a growing and ever-increasing conflict within conservative American Protestantism, and it has to do with three things: the Catholic Church, Catholicism, and Catholics. The dividing line is simple: Is the Catholic Church Christian? Is Catholicism Christian? Are Catholics Christian? Fundamentalists say no; Evangelicals say yes.
This in turn points to a number of distinct differences between the two groups. A few of those differences would include attitudes toward history, tradition, culture, society, politics, Scripture, and ecumenism. Fundamentalism is, I think it is fair to say, characterized by negativity and pessimism, and is reactionary, anti-academic, paranoid to various degrees, and very judgmental of anything outside of the Fundamentalist sphere. Evangelicalism is open to history and tradition, quite positive and affirmative towards other Christian traditions, pro-academic, intellectually active, and highly cognizant of the subtleties of theology, philosophy, and other disciplines.
Thus, when I say I am anti-Fundamentalist, I am saying that I believe Catholicism is incompatible with Fundamentalism, despite Fundamentalists’ belief in Jesus Christ, Scripture, and high moral standards. While Fundamentalists believe in the Incarnation and the Trinity – the two central and distinctive tenets of the Christian Faith – their approach and attitude towards those beliefs are vey often contrary to Catholicism (think of their knee-jerk and Nestorian-like attacks on the Theotokos). Meanwhile, the opposite is true of Evangelicalism. Much of this is bound up in the issue of intellectual integrity. It is, I am convinced, one thing for an Evangelical to question the exact role of the See of Rome in the early Church; it is quite another for a Fundamentalist to assert that the Pope is the Antichrist and the Catholic Church is the Whore of Babylon. The bottom line is that these folks often lack the sort of intellectual integrity, historical awareness, and spirit of charity that really should be the mark of a Christian. Now, it could be that I, having been told that I am going to hell, that I've been brainwashed, and that I don't love Jesus – all because I became Catholic – am overreacting. But I don't think so.
I say that Lahaye and Jenkins, as Fundamentalists, are anti-Catholic because they claim, proclaim, and vehemently assert that Catholics are not Christian and do not know Jesus Christ, and that the Catholic Church is a pagan, Satanic entity. In that camp you also have names like Jack Chick, Lorraine Boettner, Dave Hunt, James McCarthy, and Jimmy Swaggart. In the Evangelical camp you have luminaries such as Billy Graham, Charles Colson, J.I. Packer, Mark Noll, and Norman Geisler. Yes, some of these Evangelicals have serious reservations about Catholic beliefs, but they do not deny that Catholicism is Christian.
Having said all that, can anything good come from the Left Behind books and similar works? I have difficulty thinking so. Frankly, if the Left Behind books gave an accurate portrayal of Christianity, I wouldn't be a Christian. I have read many of the reader's reviews at amazon.com, and not a few non-Christians are both enjoying the stories and being turned off to Christianity at the same time. Bizarre, but true … and rather logical, I suppose, given that the books are a mixture of fast-paced action and ham-handed proselytizing.
Now, if a non-Christian had read these books and had questions about the Christian Faith, I would certainly welcome that opportunity. But what I would want to quickly establish is that Jesus Christ is the God-man who came to save us, that he founded a Church, which is the family of God, as a means of salvation, and that the Catholic Church is that Church which he founded. And if they wanted to read some excellent Catholic fiction on the end times, I would recommend the works of Michael O'Brien, whose novels include Father Elijah: An Apocalypse and Strangers and Sojourners, among others. O'Brien is a very good author; his novels are spiritually and artistically rich and really deserve a wider reading.
But I think this also highlights the shrewd nature of the Left Behind books: they appeal to a readership that is far more interested in sensationalism, clever plots, and simple writing than in substantive stories, developed characterization, and challenging prose. Snobbish? Perhaps. But I do believe that intelligent, restless souls are looking for quality and depth, and will not be satisfied by Rapturized drivel.
Finally, an analogy to help explain my perspective in a different way. If a robber entered your home and was attempting to steal your property, would you think that he was violating your rights and property or that he, being a collector of jewelry and fine art, was appreciative of your belongings and merely wanted to take them in order to further enjoy them? That's how I view the Left Behind books and all the fourth- rate rip-offs they have spawned: they claim to be Christian while providing a warped picture of Christianity, a false notion of the End Times, and a destructive view of the Catholic Church. The fact that they contain some kernels of the Gospel should not obscure the fact that they are seeking – good intentions notwithstanding – to steal and plunder, not build the Kingdom.
