The cover article about Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr., (“The Reformer”) in the October issue of Christianity Today was interesting and well-written. Sadly, it contains a major error: By no stretch of the imagination can Mohler be called a “fundamentalist.” The author correctly notes Mohler’s admiration for Carl F.H. Henry (founding editor of CT), whose The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism in 1947 played a major role in the launching of the “neo-evangelical” movement, as it was then called. Evangelicals, like Mohler, rejected the strident, pugnacious stance of fundamentalists toward those with whom they disagreed, and their withdrawal from the larger culture. Many scholarly evangelicals believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, complementary roles for men and women, and even a seven-day creation. Though not shared by other evangelicals, these convictions do not amount to “fundamentalism.” Such an error is surprising in CT, where these distinctions are – or ought to be – well known.
Additionally, the article somehow does not seem to get at the heart of why Mohler is so influential. Is it all just because of style, or is there substance there? We must assume the latter.
For more on fundamentalism and the evangelical response, including Carl Henry’s pivotal role, see Carl Henry: Theologian for All Seasons, pages 32-36. Available at: http://www.amazon.com/G.-Wright-Doyle/e/B0039K7ZEC