| The Scopes Trial held in Dayton, Tennessee, lasting for eight days in 1925, is one of the seminal events in American history. One of the first media events of this stature, the extensive coverage of the Scopes Trial resulted in thousands of words of print, interviews, and commentary sent from Dayton which helped to shape the public perception of what occurred there. How these reports was received, of course, depended on the worldview of the reader or hearer. Religious conservatives took note of any anti-religious bias aimed at those who chose the literal interpretation of the Bible. Others no doubt responded favorably to the exposure of Fundamental religious views as outdated and not in step with the times.Christian Fundamentalism, arguably the most significant religious movement of the twentieth century, was a product of chaotic times. It reflected the concerns of many believers regarding the diminishing role of religion in everyday life, and the Scopes Trial embodied those concerns. Coming on the heels of great social, political, and scientific upheaval, those individuals who would naturally turn to religion for comfort, found the same questions about modernity, science, and the Bible debated there as well, adding to their sense of uncertainty.Most conventional definitions of Fundamentalism cite the movement's strong stand for doctrinal purity and its anti-modernity position, coming from the fight over evolution. Historians seldom consider the militancy of Fundamentalism as a key to understanding how the movement formed, or with the passage of time, how militancy allowed it to grow and develop into a major social movement and religious powerhouse. With the benefit of historical hindsight, this key element adds much to the understanding of what happened at Dayton and beyond. The importance of studying this often-ignored aspect of Christian Fundamentalism should be apparent in an age when this type of religious response is increasingly common.To understand the role of militancy in relation to doctrine, another event, with much the same relationship and during the same period, provides an example. In 1917 the Bolshevik Revolution overthrew the government of Russia. Communist doctrine, the foundation of the revolution, was the subject of much debate from 1844 when Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels first met and began their collaboration on the Communist Manifesto, published in 1848. Marxist doctrine, while a great subject for debate, came into its own, when, in 1917 a small number of ardent believers in Marx's writings violently overthrew the government and deposed Czar Nicholas II. Thus, while the movement was all about doctrine and belief (Marxism) it was not until its adherents felt strongly enough about making a stand for those believes that change in Russia was effected. In the same way, Christian Fundamentalists, in 1919 and after, brought a militant challenge to a public issue which affected their belief.One area in which the 1920s media and historians tend to agree is that Fundamentalism was anti-modern. In reality, one major issue was at stake between religion and science, namely the belief that man was a special creation of God. This ageold argument began in earnest with the Copernican Revolution and saw the fight renewed with Darwinism, as huge paradigm shifts in thinking threatened commonly held beliefs and raised the specter of the battle between new scientific truths and religious dogma.While doctrine will always be important to any study of Christian Fundamentalism, the militancy with which the early Fundamentalists attacked evolution in the 1920s and later issues such as abortion provide a better understanding of how the movement arose and came to prominence in America around the Scopes Trial. This willingness to draw a line in the sand over issues that challenged their beliefs about the Bible, and fight for them to influence the surrounding culture sheds needed light on the reasons why this event is so important to America's history.By 1930 the media pronounced the death of the Fundamentalist movement. Yet, the report was highly exaggerated. Its sudden resurgence in the 1970s and 1980s upended the conventional wisdom of historians and with it, their assumptions concerning both the roots and the cause of Fundamentalism. The movement persists despite of, and thus, because of modernity. How was Fundamentalism able to recruit and charge an army of followers to lay a foundation for a stronger movement after the Scopes Trial which resurged and gained political clout in modern times? These questions provide a new and compelling perspective from which a new look at the Scopes Trial can prove valuable to theologians and historians. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)... |
