Certainly pastors are not to shelter the flock to the degree that they are never exposed to ideas which contradict the truth and wisdom of Scripture. After all, what pastor never uses error to help illuminate the truth? Quoting from Nietzsche, Freud, or Dawkins can help God’s people find their way through those ideas which, though embraced in the world, are opposed to God. But this is, of course, a long way from commending those thoughts and thinkers as faithful guides to help strengthen our understanding of God, the Scriptures, the gospel, the world, and human identity.
It appears we have a pretty intense food fight developing over Critical Race Theory (CRT). Lots of accusations are being thrown about. But that seems to be nearly unavoidable when disagreement arises over such an emotionally charged issue as race and how best to address the tensions that exist between us.
It is my belief that CRT is not only heightening these tensions, but guiding us away from the gospel and its radical solution to sin, justice, and reconciliation. You may disagree with me about that, but to simply dismiss such concerns with the pejorative “anti-intellectual fundamentalist,” seems rather anti-intellectual and fundamentalist.
I confess that I do wonder where all of these calls to “eat the meat and spit out the bones” were during the debate over the Nashville Statement two years ago at the PCA General Assembly. This is especially poignant given that the Nashville Statement was criticized primarily not for what it states, but for what it does not state. In other words, it was being opposed not on the basis that it advances error, but because it lacked proper nuance on certain matters. Why then would we want to now commend Critical Race Theory, a system deeply influenced by presuppositions that are antithetical to the Scriptures?
* * *
As I mentioned in my previous post, scholars are obliged to dig through the “bones” of ideas, theories, and worldviews. And, as I stated previously, whether we are aware of it fully or not, we discard the bones of various ideas quite regularly. We do it every time we change the channel during the halftime show of the Super Bowl or read C.S. Lewis or listen to NPR. It takes no unique insight to understand that much of life is lived by distinguishing between what is valuable and what is harmful. Indeed, most of the Christians I know navigate their way around bones quite well.
The question that concerns me most in the debate over CRT is the role of the pastor in the lives of God’s people. Certainly pastors are not to shelter the flock to the degree that they are never exposed to ideas which contradict the truth and wisdom of Scripture. After all, what pastor never uses error to help illuminate the truth? Quoting from Nietzsche, Freud, or Dawkins can help God’s people find their way through those ideas which, though embraced in the world, are opposed to God. But this is, of course, a long way from commending those thoughts and thinkers as faithful guides to help strengthen our understanding of God, the Scriptures, the gospel, the world, and human identity.
Critical Race Theory, like its parent Critical Theory, is a worldview. It portrays the world through the lens of race. And through that lens it seeks to establish a narrative for understanding the world, culture, race, human identity, and justice. That is no small ambition. But this was the project of the architects of Critical Theory. For them, Marxism was too modest in its proposals. It needed to frame all of society from the economic to the familial to the psychological to the sexual. It’s offspring Critical Race Theory seeks to do the same thing. Certainly Angela Davis, a scholar and devotee of Critical Theory, understands that CRT is a system of thought shaping one’s view of all of life.
