Many people of goodwill earnestly desire to combat injustice, eradicate racism, and eliminate oppression. Who wouldn’t? I do. This is true of men and women inside and outside Christianity.
At the same time, we know, from “lived experience” (or history) that those who forget the errors and excesses of the past are doomed to repeat them. One of the challenges society faces (including those inside and outside the Church) is that our culture over the last 75 years has become increasingly less literate, less well-read, and has largely forgotten the lessons of the past while calling others “ignorant.” Consequently, when old ideas repackaged for today (Ecclesiastes 1:9) are presented they are often accepted uncritically because they sound good to the unschooled ear (Proverbs 14:12): “12 There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death.” Such is the cost of true ignorance.
The Apostle Paul warns us to “see to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ,“ in Colossians 2:8. Many well-intended Christians (and Christian institutions) have inadvertently ignored this warning, from the Southern Baptist Convention and at least two of its seminaries to groups closer to home. People of goodwill undiscerningly embark on the Intersectionality Train unaware that it leads to a catastrophic crash and a clash of worldviews. Having just completed a thorough examination, we want to summarize Hillside Church’s view on Critical Theory and Intersectionality within the Christian experience.
Let’s understand what Critical (Race) Theory is and is not. It is a worldview. It is not about race although race is the dominant theme in our culture—for now. Critical theory is a worldview that divides humanity into two competing, or warring, tribes, the oppressor and the oppressed. The oppressor is anyone who has a real or perceived advantage over others. Think of it this way, Critical theory sees only two types of people in this world. Those with power are the powerful. Those without are the powerless. The base assumption of Critical Theory (and Intersectionality) is that the powerful always, always oppress the powerless. Consequently, the oppressed, or the powerless, possess a greater degree of moral authority. Vis-à-vis their oppression they tend to see the world as it is and possess greater moral clarity. The powerful or the oppressor have become numb to the plight of the oppressed. Their oppressiveness (or these days, “whiteness”) renders them ignorant or clueless. Oppressiveness and privilege are simply part of their moral and societal DNA. It’s who they are, oppressors, and what they do—oppress. Occasionally, the oppressed become so accustomed to their plight they see it as normal. Critical Theorists call this internalizing oppression. Intersectionality is a philosophy that serves as a sort of a force multiplier within Critical Theory. People may belong to more than one oppressed group or more than one oppressor group. Here is a shortlist of oppressor groups: heterosexuals, “Whites (capital ‘w’),” males, and Europeans. Here is a shortlist of oppressed groups: gays and lesbians, transgendered people, “Blacks (capital ‘b’), females, and other people of color.
Intersectionality assigns demerits based upon how many oppressor groups one falls into while assigning merits or privilege points depending upon how many oppressed groups one falls into. Based on this system society is to show you some level of partiality as determined by where you fall within the intersectional hierarchy. Typically, terms like hierarchy and privilege are considered negatives but the reality is this is true only when applied to oppressor groups to their advantage.
On an Intersectional continuum, a white, heterosexual male of European descent would be the proto-oppressor, or the archetypal oppressor, finding himself on the lowest level of the intersectional totem. He would have the least amount of moral authority as well as the greatest amount of moral responsibility because he is part of an oppressive tribe that has mistreated others down through the centuries. When speaking into matters of race or culture the White, heterosexual male of European descent would do well, in the eyes of Critical Theorists, to “shut up and listen.” A Black heterosexual male would have more moral authority because, being Black, he is a member of an oppressed group. However, a Black heterosexual male is at the same time a member of two oppressor groups: heterosexuals and males. Consequently, he would have less moral authority than a Black, heterosexual female, who is a member of two oppressed groups: Blacks and females. Therefore, she has more moral authority or privilege. She is able to tell the Black, heterosexual male to “shut up and listen.” However, she, herself, must confront the reality that she is an oppressor, herself. After all, she is heterosexual. When confronted by a Black lesbian, it is her turn to shut up and listen because the Black lesbian is a member of three oppressed groups: female, Black, and she is not heterosexual. Nevertheless, in the ranking and privilege system of Critical Theory and Intersectionality, she is outranked in terms of moral authority by a Black, Trans woman (perhaps in transition). The lesbian is an oppressor vis-à-vis her gender assignment, resulting in her need to “shut up and listen” to the Black trans woman who is a member of no oppressor group, per se.
Counterintuitively, the greater one’s moral authority on the scale of Intersectional privilege, the less moral responsibility they have. This is what separates “Social Justice” from “Justice.” “Justice, based on either the Bible or the rule of law, asks the question, “Was a crime committed and who committed it.” “Social Justice” asks why did the person commit this crime (and against whom)? Depending on one’s level of moral authority and oppression one has a greater privilege than others and may get somewhat of a proverbial pass for their crime if committed for the right reason against the right level of oppressor. Rioting and looting are often described as reparations. It is part of human nature to see an oppressor get his or even her ‘comeuppance.’ It is understood that some degree of partiality must be shown to the oppressed or the poor and less concern for the great or the powerful.
Tragically, it is these types of power relationships that have led to the collapse of the attempts at Utopia via Critical Theory over the centuries. The power relationships created by Intersectionality breed new oppressor groups, many of whom were once numbered among the oppressed, as they invariably fall into the trap of embracing the oppression of others. Critical Theory and Intersectionality facilitates, if not create, a culture of revenge. This is also inspired by a desire for ideological purity. The more pure look down upon and invariably oppress the less pure, who are quite often described as counter-revolutionary or traitors. Additionally, in a quest for societal and Utopian purity, the impure are often eliminated. Today, this can be relatively bloodless. We call this canceling or de-platforming. This might involve a professor losing tenure or her faculty position. It may involve a department head’s forced resignation. An entire board could be removed. One sees this done with an increasing fundamentalist further. We are reminded that another word for Worldview is religion. Critical Theory proponents down through the centuries have evolved (devolved) a religious fervor in the quest for doctrinal purity. In almost every occasion in history, this has led to near genocide and violence (The French Revolution of 1789, the Russian Revolution of 1917 and forward, National Socialism’s ascendency in Germany from 1933 to 1945, China’s Cultural Revolution followed by the Great Leap Forward, Pol Pot’s Cambodia from 1975 onward, to the present situation in Venezuela. In every case, the quest for a utopian condition led to violence, death, and greater suffering than the previous hegemony, unbelievable as it seems. Even the autonomous zone in Seattle (CHAZZ or CHOP) things quickly went totalitarian with unpredictable detentions, interrogations, beatings, and at least 4 deaths. Why is this?
Christianity and Critical Theory are incompatible worldviews. They are polar opposites. Admirably, each seeks to address the challenges of a fallen world and the inequities that are bound to result. However, each as a diametrically opposed view of God, humanity, sin, salvation, and holy books. Critical Theory assumes that God does not exist. Intersectionality fails to recognize or account for that God is at work redeeming a fallen world where humanity sought autonomy from the hegemony of God, Himself. Neither understands the sovereignty of God or the fallenness of humanity. As a Naturalist philosophy, Critical Theory and Intersectionality (the two are inseparable) fails to consider that God gifts people, places people, and calls this into roles of privilege and power (think Joseph or Moses), having raised them up for a specific time and a specific mission. Neither understands that God causes all things to work together for good (Romans 8:28) and even what some intend for evil God intends for good (Genesis 50:20). Believing humans to be divine or perfectible, Critical Theory fails to account for sin—there is none righteous, no not one… all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God… the wages of sin is death but the free gift of God is eternal life in Jesus Christ our Lord. While the Bible spells out and defines sin at the most basic levels in all its permutations, starting with the Ten Commandments, Critical Theory defines sin as the exercise of (or projection of) power. Sin is a collective, race, or class issue rather than a personal one. The soul, the individual, who sins shall perish (Ezekiel 18:20). Intersectionality and Critical Theory see salvation as social liberation, activism, and protest. It comes through works, as part of a works-based religion or worldview. Christ insists that salvation is by grace not works (Ephesians 2:8-9) and that each person who is saved has a special, personal mission to fulfill (Ephesians 2:10). God says I will remember your sins no more. Critical Theory insists on penance, reparations—a comeuppance. There is no grace. The artificial distinctions Critical Theory makes contradict God’s will and God’s word (Galatians 3:28-29 and Acts 17:26).
As a result of these fatal flaws, Critical Theory makes the wrong diagnosis of what ails society and prescribes a deadly poison as its panacea for what ails humanity. While Critical Theory and Intersectionality have the benefit of surfacing issues that must not and cannot be ignored, their erroneous prescription is doomed to fail as it has for hundreds if not thousands of years. A new order and a new world start with new life, which only comes through Christ changing us from the inside out (2 Corinthians 5:17; Ezekiel 36:26-27). Races, classes, genders, and humans cannot be reconciled to one another until individuals are first reconciled to God and empowered by the Holy Spirit to change themselves, become Spirit-empowered new creations.
Invariably, as the Southern Baptist Convention did in 2019, someone will suggest we “spit out the bones but swallow the meat.” Even if one ‘spits out the bones,’ the meat is infused with the deadliest of poisons—what amounts to a satanic worldview. That’s because Critical Theory has its own canon of scriptures. It denies Scripture at it core, replacing Matthew, Mark, Luke, et al with Cone, DiAngelo, Fendi, and Marx. It has a wrong view of God, a wrong view of humanity, a wrong view of sin, a wrong view of salvation, and a wrong view of truth. Christians imbibing this dangerous brew end of with faith plus… the Gospel plus… much like the Jehovah Witnesses and Mormons have the Bible plus added holy books that “clarify” Scripture or at least purport to do so.
Critical Theory violates God’s justice, with a perverse view of justice, from holding those accountable for sins they themselves did not commit because they are members of a so-called oppressive people group to showing partiality to the poor in the name of “social justice:”
“Now suppose this man fathers a son who sees all the sins that his father has done; he sees, and does not do likewise… 16 does not oppress anyone, exacts no pledge, commits no robbery, but gives his bread to the hungry and covers the naked with a garment… 17 he shall not die for his father’s iniquity; he shall surely live. 19 “Yet you say, ‘Why should not the son suffer for the iniquity of the father?’ When the son has done what is just and right, and has been careful to observe all my statutes, he shall surely live. 20 The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself… 25 “Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ … Is my way not just? Is it not your ways that are not just? (Ezekiel 18:15-25)
“You shall do no injustice in court. You shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but in righteousness shall you judge your neighbor. 16 You shall not go around as a slanderer among your people, and you shall not stand up against the life of your neighbor: I am the LORD. 17 “You shall not hate your brother in your heart, but you shall reason frankly with your neighbor, lest you incur sin because of him. 18 You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the LORD. (Leviticus 19:15-18)
For a greater exposition of these passages go here.
Critical Theory is, at its root, contra-Christian. It outwardly seems and seeks to do good but in reality seems determined to do harm. It is the proverbial Trojan Horse that rides along with well-intended people of good will—even in the church—but sooner or later infiltrates and destroys all it touches. This is one reason why we hosted last week’s conference on Critical Theory in our discussion Race to Reconciliation. This is why we taught an entire sermon series on Race, Racism, and Reconciliation. For these reasons, as Leadership, our elders have determined that we will not support any group that embraces or tolerates this harmful and damning worldview, despite their seemingly good intentions. This includes missionaries, mission agencies, seminaries, denominations, parachurch organizations, and Christian colleges and universities. We know that many uncritically embrace these ideas in ignorance. However, in shepherding the flock of God, we are to protect our people, given them (and their children) guidance, and exercise careful stewardship over the Lord’s resources in the process.
Let’s understand that one can hate racism and reject Critical Theory. It’s not one or the other. There is a biblical path between these. Christendom and Christians do well to understand this. We live in a world of extremes. We desire a biblical balance.
