Ignorance Is A Terrible Witness

Any casual discussion on Critical Theory must first come to grips with its own seemingly contradictory existence. Critical Theory is a very dense and deep topic so how could a casual discussion of it exist? And any casual discussion on Critical Theory must immediately acknowledge the difference between Critical Theory and critical theory. The former refers to a specific group of intellectuals known as the Frankfurt School while the latter refers to opposition to domination and oppression inspecific circumstances where that opposition has a 'similar practical aim' as what was taught by those in the Frankfurt School (click here and refer to the first 3 paragraphs). 

Neil Shenvi (click here for a bio) and Pat Sawyer (click here for his cv) recently wrote an article posted in the Gospel Coalition website called The Incompatibility Of Critical Theory And Christianity (click here for the article). We should note that the article posted in the Gospel Coalition website is just another article written on Critical Thinking by both of these men.



The first thing we should note is that there are two versions of Critical Theory. There is Critical Theory in the narrow sense. That sense involves the thinking and teachings of those known as the Frankfurt School. And there is critical theory in the broader sense. That sense deals opposition to specific kinds of oppression provided that there is a general following of the philosophical and practical aims Critical Theory by that opposition. A noteworthy difference between the narrow sense and the broad sense of critical thinking is that the narrow sense of the term capitalizes the first letter of each part of the term while the broader sense does not.
 
The second thing we should note is that the title is both contradicted by parts of the article and says more that it is intended to. The title is potentially contradicted by the article's recognition of individual points made by Critical Theory. Those points include:

• Race is a social construct
• Institutions can spread ideas

At the same time, what is suggested by saying that Critical Theory and Christianity are incompatible depends in part by the word 'incompatible.' If that word is taken in its absolute sense, then noting some points of agreement with Critical Theory contradicts the title. Otherwise, the two writers are merely saying that there are too many difference between Christianity and Critical Theory for Christians to adopt or embrace a significant part of Critical Theory.

But there is something else that needs to be said here. The degree to which Christians can borrow from Critical Theory depends not as much on the Scriptures, as the writers seem to indicate, but on how Christians believe they should share a democratic society with unbelievers. If Christians believe that their faith or even themselves should hold a place of supremacy over society then the writers of this article are correct in saying that Critical Theory and Christianity are incompatible. That is because Critical Theory and Christianity work from different metanarratives and advocates of both sets of beliefs would be vying for society to be based on.

But what if Christians looked to share society with unbelievers as equals. Then society would be based on a collaboration of the thinking of Christianity, provided that the borrowed beliefs neither privileges a group nor oppresses any groups, and the views of unbelievers. Christians would then not be placed in this competitive role of trying to establish any part of Christianity to rule over society. We could be more relaxed in terms of what we borrow from other ideologies like Critical Thinking.

The Gospel Coalition website belongs to a group of Christians who are called Transformationalists. That to varying degrees, transformationalists want a place of supremacy for Christians by which they can control laws and cultural values according to our religious beliefs--I am a religiously conservative Christian and so I share their beliefs but not their desire to control. As a result, the notion of Christians sharing society as equals, which would be its role in Critical Theory's notion of a 'substantive democracy,' is truly foreign to Transformationalists. Even their Christian nemesis, 2KT advocates who disagree with the Transformationalists' thirst for control over society struggle with wanting to share society with unbelievers as equals.

The writers of the article are correct in noting that the metanarratives of Critical Theory and Christianity are different. But here we should note two things. First, that when society and culture were based on a Christian metanarrative, we had a great deal of domination and oppression. Second, a false metanarrative doesn't always lead to conclusions Christians can't accept. This leads us back to the point that how much Christians can feel comfortable in borrowing from ideologies like Critical Thinking depends on how we believe we should share society with others.

It should also be pointed out that the degree to which Christians can borrow from or embrace Critical Thinking is also partially controlled by the other ideologies that we hold to other than our faith. Those ideologies include Capitalism, belief in small government, Republican political thought, and American Exceptionalism. Those who grew up in religiously conservative Christian homes found those secular ideologies to be conflated with their Christian faith. And thus separating the ideologies one grew up with from one's faith can be a very tearing experience. So the degree to which one can borrow from or embrace Critical Theory might be, in the name of one's religion, controlled more by a Christian's secular beliefs than his or her religious beliefs.

We should also note that the New Testament never seems to endorse any kind of Christian control over society. That doesn't mean that Christians have no place in determining society's morals and values. Such a point doesn't silence Christians in society. What that point does is to limit how Christians share society with others to of being equals. 

No short article, such as the one written by Shenvi and Sawyer can adequately give an overview of Critical Theory. But that is the least of the problems that this article on Critical Theory written by Shenvi and Sawyer has. In the end, articles like the one commenting on Critical Theory sometimes reveal more about the Christian doing the reviewing the theory being reviewed. And I believe that has occurred in the article written above.