Cultural issues are legion in the United States of America. Recently, issues surrounding Black Lives Matter, Immigration, Covid, Politics, Gender, and others, have crowded the minds of Americans. Adding to the stress of these issues are the ongoing public debates related to which of these issues is the most important.
Have I also mentioned that we live in the age of information overload?! How are we to make sense of reality when reality is so confusing? The difficult times we live in have a tendency to corner us either into submission or passive aggressiveness.
Nevertheless, we cannot ignore these challenging issues.
Critical Theory and Critical Race Theory
Critical Race Theory (CRT) is hotly debated across our land. This ideology (which I believe is a correct characterization of what CRT is, perhaps better yet a “worldview”) is causing great stir amongst parents who have opposed Critical Race Theory being taught in public schools. Their criticism is valid. But before I validate their stance against CRT, let me take a step back.
CRT is not to be confused with Critical Theory. Critical Theory is the umbrella from which CRT stands under. In other words, CRT originates from Critical Theory. The main proponents of Critical Theory are Robin DiAngelo and Özlem Sensoy who co-authored the book Is Everyone Really Equal? In their book, they define critical theory in the following way:
“A critical approach to social justice refers to specific theoretical perspectives that recognize that society is stratified (i.e. divided and unequal) in significant and far-reaching ways along social group lines that include race, class, gender, sexuality, and ability. Critical social justice recognizes inequality as deeply embedded in the fabric of society (i.e. as structural), and actively seeks to change this. The definition we apply is rooted in a critical theoretical approach.”
At the center of their argument is the fact, they claim, that American society is rotten in its core. DiAngelo spouses the view that American society is ruled by a hegemonic majority of white men who oppress the marginalized. In White Fragility, DiAngelo writes, “a positive white identity is an impossible goal. White identity is inherently racist; white people do not exist outside the system of white supremacy … Rather, I strive to be ‘less white.’ To be less white is to be less racially oppressive” (p. 149–50).
Together with DiAngelo is a collection of other people like Ibram X. Kendi and Nikole Hannah-Jones who believe that blacks are still majorly oppressed by the systems of American society and never able to achieve proper societal status. This view is problematic, because it does not accurately describe 21st century America. Though systemic racism was very strong in the 50s and 60s, we have come a long way and no longer have government sanctioned segregation like Jim Crow laws, and of course, no slavery. Have I mentioned we have recently elected a black president for two terms, currently have a black vice-president, governors, senators, and congressman and congresswomen of color?
Not all agree America is the greatest country on earth (I certainly do, despite its flaws). Nikole Hannah-Jones, for instance, is the author of the pseudo-historical 1619 project. The 1619 project is rooted in the idea “that America was founded upon, built upon, and primarily formed by slavery.” On her website, she claims that America was “built on racial caste.” For her, America was not founded on July 4th, 1776 through the Declaration of Independence and fully established after the finalized writing of the Constitution in 1787. Rather, it was founded in 1619. The idea that America was founded in 1619 serves to pinpoint the founding of America upon the arrival of the first African slaves on American soil.
Now, back to DiAngelo and Sensoy, they write, “Our analysis of social justice is based on a school of thought know as Critical Theory. Critical Theory refers to a body of scholarship that examines how society works …” (p. 25). For them, there are two categories of people that comprise society: the dominant, and the minoritized. The dominant group is the perpetual oppressor of the minoritized. They believe “sexism, racism, classism, ableism, and heterosexism are specific forms of oppression” (p. 61).
Okay, enough on critical theory…
Critical Race Theory Explained
Dr. Neil Shenvi has done extensive research on CRT. He has listed six different ways pastors can preach against CRT. Opposition to CRT is not only an issue to be tackled by concerned parents. Because CRT is a type of worldview, Christians have too responded against its claims. For context, men like John Piper, Tim Keller, and all Southern Baptist Presidents have identified CRT as incompatible with Christian worldview.
The most seminal work on critical race theory is the book Critical Race Theory: The Cutting Edge, by Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic. The book is a short read, only 856 pages!! (insert sarcasm). The authors address common terms such as intersectionality, affirmative action, sexual politics and much more. A few aspects of CRT will be analyzed below.
Let me just provide you with a disclaimer: CRT is not easy to understand. If you ask two proponents of CRT to define it you will likely get two different answers. Nicholas Hartlep from the University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee identifies 5 major tenets of CRT: (1) the notion that racism is ordinary and not aberrational; (2) the idea of an interest convergence; (3) the social construction of race; (4) the idea of storytelling and counter-storytelling; and (5) the notion that whites have actually been recipients of civil rights legislation.
Neil Shenvi points out 7 tenets instead, from Delgado and Stefancic’s work:
He claims that while no single definition exists for CRT, many scholars agree on the centrality of seven tenets:
[Tenet 1:] Racism is a normal part of American life, often lacking the ability to be distinctively recognized… A CRT lens unveils the various forms in which racism continually manifests itself, despite espoused institutional values regarding equity and social justice.
[Tenet 2:] [Ideas like] liberalism, neutrality, objectivity, colorblindness, and meritocracy… camouflage [how] racial advantage propels the self-interests, power, and privileges of the dominant group.
[Tenet 3:] CRT gives voice to the unique perspectives and lived experiences of people of color… CRT uses counternarratives as a way to highlight discrimination, offer racially different interpretations of policy, and challenge the universality of assumptions made about people of color.
[Tenet 4:] CRT recognizes interest-convergence, the process whereby the white power structure ‘will tolerate or encourage racial advances for Blacks only when they also promote white self-interests’.
[Tenet 5:] Revisionist History is another tenet of CRT [which] suggests that American history be closely scrutinized and reinterpreted as opposed to being accepted at face value and truth.
[Tenet 6:] CRT also relies on Racial Realists, or individuals who not only recognize race as a social construct, but also realize that ‘racism is a means by which society allocates privilege and status.’
[Tenet 7:] CRT critiques [claims that]: (a) [colorblindness] will eliminate racism; (b) racism is a matter of individuals, not systems; and (c) one can fight racism without paying attention to sexism, homophobia, economic exploitation, and other forms of oppression or injustice
Expounding on 3 Tenets of CRT
CRT idea #1 = individual identity is inseparable from group identity.
Stephanie Wildman claims, “Because part of racism is systemic, I benefit from the privilege that I am struggling to see…. All whites are racist in this [systemic] use of the term because we benefit from systemic white privilege” – Stephanie Wildman with Adrienne Davis, “Language and Silence: Making Systems of Privilege Visible”, Readings for Diversity and Social Justice (p. 56). In other words, all whites are by nature racist. Strangely enough, Wildman seems to have no issue labeling herself a “racist.”
For Wildman, and others, white privilege seems to equal racism. But what does the fact that someone was born with a certain skin pigmentation make them racist? Invertedly, she is ascribing racist motive to all white people simply because minorities have been oppressed in the past. Another term that pops up is “whiteness.” Patricia Hill Collins, in Toward a New Vision: Race, Class, and Gender as Categories of Analysis and Connect, says, “it also involves the often painful process of seeing how your whiteness has shaped your personal biography… how have [your mother and father] passed on the benefits of their whiteness to you?”.
Now, if you were to ask me about my whiteness, I would have you no answers. Commonly, no white person thinks of his or her whiteness. Why? Because the color of our skin does not define who we are! Group identity only serves to place “whites” (who is really white?) under the category of oppressor.
Delgado and Stefancic claim that “racism is normal, not aberrant, in American society. Because it is an ingrained feature of our landscape, racism looks ordinary and natural to persons in the culture” (p. 2-3). Betita Martínez, a Chicana movement leader writes, “As a system, racism affects every aspect of life in a country. By not understanding that racism is systemic, we guarantee that it will continue.” According to Martínez racism is defined by systems of oppression, which America perpetuates.
The problem? There is plenty of evidence that in 21st century America systemic racism is not the norm. Does it exist in certain places? Yes. But besides the people I mentioned above, some of our highest paid athletes are African American, we have a plethora of people from Hispanic background in power (i.e. Ted Cruz, Alexandra Ocasio Cortez), supreme court justices who are women, black, and hispanic, not to mention the fact that 13 percent of all active US circuit and district court judges are black. Did I also mention Thomas Sowell, who is considered by many as the greatest living public intellectual, is African American?
Christian Worldview Response #1 = “Racism is a sin” (Ex. 23:1-8, Deut. 16:19, Lev. 19:15, James 2:1-4)
The Bible defines humankind not by its collective worth, but by the intrinsic value human beings possess for being created in the imago Dei (image of God – Genesis 1:27-28). The imago Dei in human beings is distorted because of the Fall. Because of what happened in the beginning, we are prone to sin, and consequently racism. However, as Dr. Shenvi points out, “A Christian’s primary identity is in Christ, not in their demographic group.”
Though human beings are inherently sinful and prone to depravity, we do have the capacity to chose not to sin. Through the grace of God in Christ Jesus we are also able to overcome the sway of sin over our lives. Therefore, Christ followers of all races are able to not be racist. For the intents and purposes of this article I define racism as “the sinful choice a person makes in relation to another based on their race or ethnicity, judging his own superior.”
Christians believe, or at least they should, that all human beings regardless of the color of their skin have worth. In the end when all the saints are gathered before God, every single ethnicity (panta ta ethne)will be represented before the throne of God (Revelation 5 and 7). The challenges of our day, related to racism, are not particular to just one specific group of people.
DiAngelo and Sensoy clarify their stance writing, “Critical scholars define racism as a systemic relationship of unequal power between White people and peoples of Color. Whiteness refers to the specific dimensions of racism that elevates White people over all peoples of Color” (p. 142). The problem? Racism is not a one-way road. Blacks, Hispanics, Europeans (of all colors), Middle Eastern, and Asian peoples can also be racist, because racism is a personal choice and not inherit to a certain particular group of people.
Of course, the differences in opinion lie in how one defines racism. DiAngelo and Sensoy pinpoint racism unto a specific group of people, but if racism is about superiority fueled by ethnocentrism, then their definition is flawed. The idea, espoused by the likes of Shakti Butler, that people of color cannot be racist, is erroneous. We are all prone toward racism, but can personally effectuate it or not.
One of the key ways to overcome racism is to view all people as being created in God’s image. Furthermore, racism and a superiority complex is confronted at the cross and in the person of Jesus (Philippians 2:5-11). CRT only exacerbates racism by pinning people of different races (whites vs all others) against each other.
CRT Proponents Ideas #2 = all white people are oppressive and intolerant, regardless of the fact they may not consider themselves as such
Mary McClintock in How to Interrupt Oppressive Behavior, writes, “Prior to celebrating diversity, we must first eliminate intolerance. No matter what form it takes or who does it, we must all take action to stop intolerance when it happens.” The problem is that proponents of CRT believe that disagreement equals intolerance. Just the fact that someone is opposed to CRT means they are intolerant, which means they are by default engaging in racism. However, how can one claim others are intolerant meanwhile holding onto an intolerable position? Or it is simply that I disagree? I hold on to the latter.
DiAngelo believes “a positive white identity is an impossible goal. White identity is inherently racist; white people do not exist outside the system of white supremacy” (White Fragility, p. 149). CRT proponents believe that whites have structured society in a way that primarily benefits their own interest. This idea is known as interest convergence. McClintock clarifies, “Stated more precisely, interest convergence is the notion that whites will allow and support racial justice/progress to the extent that there is something positive in it for them, or a “convergence” between the interests of whites and non-whites.”
Christian Worldview Response #2 = Our identity is not based on the color of our skin
Christ followers believe their identity is shaped primarily by who they are in Christ. We believe we are God’s children (John 1:12), that sin, including the sin of racism, does not define us (Romans 6:6), that we are his chosen people who were redeemed by the blood of Christ on the cross (Gal 2:20), that we are God’s handiwork creation (Ephesians 2:10), and that our newness of life because we are in Christ means that our old sinful nature no longer dominates our lives (Romans 6:1–17).
Today, Christianity claims more believers in the Majority World than in the West. This means that God’s plan to redeem all peoples to himself will soon be accomplished (hopefully sooner rather than later…come Lord Jesus!). All Christians celebrate the fact that salvation is available to all, regardless of their ethnicity. The goal of Gospel proclamation is one of identity; that we move people from enemies of God to becoming children of God.
Intolerance is not a characteristic of the Christian faith. I’m not talking about doctrinal intolerance, because there are certainly things that Christians hold on to that are offensive to the world and contrary to its standards, which are not to be tolerated (i.e., that Christ is not God). Intolerance, driven by a feeling of superiority toward people of another color other than your own, is racist and is not appropriate.
CRT’s view is inherently intolerant. To say that “a positive white identity is an impossible goal” is erroneous. Christ can and does change one’s life. I know white people who considered themselves racist that are no longer racist because of Christ’s work in their heart. How do I know they are not racist? Through their actions. They no longer demean people of color, they speak kindly to people of different ethnicities, allow them into their homes, serve them, and go out of their way to bless them. All because they understand that Christ’s love compels us to love our brothers and sisters in Christ, and everyone, regardless of their cultural, economic, or racial background.
CRT Idea #3 = race is a social construct
Hartlep explains this view by highlighting the various ways race is viewed as a social construct:
The “social construction thesis” or declaration that “race is a social construct” has been one of CRT’s hallmark mantras and core issues. One does not have to peer too farback in U.S. history to ascertain that race has been socially constructed2. Instances of socially constructing race may include: (1) the infamous Dred Scott v. Sandford case whereby the U.S. Supreme Court declared that “Negroes,” whether free or enslaved, were not citizens; or (2) the infamous “one drop rule,” a relic from the Jim Crow era where one drop of black blood made an individual “black.”; or (3) how in 1935 minorities were denied Social Security and excluded from unions. In 1935, Congress passed two laws that protected American workers and excluded nonwhites. The Social Security Act exempted agricultural workers and domestic servants (predominantly African American, Mexican, and Asian) from receiving old-age insurance, while the Wagner Act, guaranteeing workers’ rights, did not prohibit unions from racial discrimination. Nonwhites were locked out of higher-paying jobs and union benefits such as medical care, job security, and pensions.
Ta-Nehisi Coates provides some insight onto the idea that race is a social construct. He writes, “Our notion of what constitutes ‘white’ and what constitutes ‘black’ is a product of social context. It is utterly impossible to look at the delineation of a ‘Southern race’ and not see the Civil War, the creation of an ‘Irish race’ and not think of Cromwell’s ethnic cleansing, the creation of a ‘Jewish race’ and not see anti-Semitism. There is no fixed sense of ‘whiteness’ or ‘blackness,’ not even today.” He also points out at the end of his article What We Mean When We Say ‘Race Is a Social Construct’ that, “Race is no more dependent on skin color today than it was on ‘Frankishness’ in Emerson’s day. Over history, race has taken geography, language, and vague impressions as its basis. ‘Race,’ writes the great historian Nell Irvin Painter, ‘is an idea, not a fact.’ Indeed. Race does not need biology.”
Christian Worldview Response #3 = race is not socially constructed, race is God-given
God is a creative God. He has sovereignly chosen to create each person uniquely as a bearer of his image. The various human ethnicities are to be celebrated as part of God’s creative design reflected in the human race. In a sense we can say that we are all part of one race: the human race.
The human race was diverse from the beginning. In Genesis 10, the sons of Noah are spread throughout the earth, each with their particular characteristics and ethnic group. They were all part of one offspring. Furthermore more, every person mentioned in the Bible, and that has ever lived, are sons and daughters of Adam and Eve. We are all the offspring of Eve, which scientists call Mitochondrial Eve (the first woman of all human beings).
From Noah’s sons came all the different manifestations of human race as humans spread throughout the earth. As God confused human language, different people groups were created (Genesis 11). But note that racial diversity existed prior to the tower of Babel. Why? Because God chose to create us all different. Different shades of skin, hair, eyes, and all other physical traits. And what is most fascinating to me is that every single person that has ever walked on earth has a unique DNA and soul. Its incredible! … and we should praise God for his creativity! … Not group people into tribes and pit Americans, and Christians, against one another.
A Final Word to My Brothers and Sisters in Christ
There is so much more that can be said about CRT. Nevermind the fact that this is probably the longest blog article I have ever written! Now, I’m not an expert on the subject at all. I’m simply a student seeking understanding. Though there are certain aspects of CRT that do make sense and help us understand the struggles of our society, many of its ideas are totally precarious.
I do recommend a podcast episode hosted by Justin Brierley on the Unbelievable? show. In this podcast Neil Shenvi and Rasool Berry, teaching pastor at The Bridge Church in Brooklyn, debate the subject in a really helpful way. You can watch it here.
Now, our tendency is to be argumentative. I hope my article does not come across as such. My goal is toward a better understanding of CRT, its tenets, pitfalls, and how we can respond to it from a Christian worldview. We would be wise to withhold judgment upon each other as it relates to sensitive issues. Pastor John Piper, when talking about CRT warns believers not to slander and silence one another.
Paul encouraged the believers at Ephesus to “be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you” (Ephesians 4:31–32). Piper points out, “Blame is easy to pass on. Rather, we must learn to be gracious, loving, and to listen to each other. Racism does exist in America and around the world. We must stand against it. But let’s also be careful not to slander.” He is also wise to point out, “Instead of silencing or denouncing someone who is wrestling with the intellectual or theoretical or epistemological roots of false beliefs and unbiblical thinking, let’s give each other some room to be different in the way we attack the same evil.” In other words, while trying to make sense of CRT we must not ascribe motives to people trying to make sense of reality.
Neil Shenvi points out, “CRT is correct to note that we do not live in a color-blind or post-racial society, that racial disparities still are enormous, and that racism is still a real problem.” However, CRT’s definition of racism is flawed. Should we be against racism? Yes, both personal or otherwise. We should deny all forms of white supremacy. We should also deny claims that label a certain group as being inherently racist. Racism is a personal sin issue. Should we seek racial justice? Yes. But we must seek it from a Christian worldview perspective, not CRT or any other world philosophy.
At the end of the day, what our nation needs, in fact, what the world needs, is Jesus’ love, peace, forgiveness, and redemption. May the Lord have mercy on all of us in relation to the issues facing our culture!
Read another one of my articles here: https://pastordanielmessina.com/thoughts-from-derek-chauvins-verdict/
