WHAT'S NEW

About
My Other Blog
Blog Schedule
Activism
Past Blog Posts
Various &
a Sundry Blogs
Favorite
Websites
My Stuff
On The Web
Audio-Visual
Library
Favorite
Articles
This Month's Scripture Verse:

But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with such people.
2 Timothy 3:1-5

SEARCH THIS BLOG

Friday, November 6, 2020

Why Many Conservative Christians Oppose Critical Race Theory.

 There are not too many religiously conservative Reformed Christian leaders who take a shining to Critical Race Theory (CRT). This article will review one such assessment of CRT from Pastor Joe Griffo (click here), a minister of an independent Reformed church. Such a church can seem to be an oxymoron to many of us who have Reformed roots because to be reformed often means to be in a church in which there is denominational oversight. But such has nothing to do with Griffo's analysis of CRT.

 In a previous article, Griffo accused CRT of being a religion because it shared some characteristics especially with religious practices (click here for that article). I understand the confusion. But since most religions contain beliefs,  any given religion is, at least in part, an ideology just as CRT is an ideology. But such does not make CRT a religion.

Why isn't CRT a religion, especially in the western sense of the word? CRT is not concerned with supernatural beings or the spiritual universe. It is neither concerned with making any systematic statements about God nor about the relationship between God and man. So CRT is not concerned about the vertical relationship between God and man. Rather, CRT is speaking to society, not the followers of any given religion, about part of the horizontal relationship people have with each other. 

In addition, CRT is speaking to a specific, gravely immoral problem that has plagued America since its beginning: racism. To use the word 'gravely' is not hyperbole since many people have been murdered because of this problem. And thus it seems that while Griffo notes similarities between CRT and religion, he fails to pay adequate attention to the differences between them.

The article being reviewed today discusses CRT in relation to sin (click here for the article). The problem I see in Griffo's article is one of concepts. Because Griffo sees CRT as a religion, he assumes that CRT is discussing sin in when it discusses racism. And while racism is and/or does contain sin, CRT is not concerned with neither sin in general nor how should we approach God about the sin of racism. Why? It is because CRT is only addressing the horizontal relationship between people.

Another CRT concept that Griffo struggles with is that of racism. Griffo complains that CRT has redefined racism with the implication that the redefinition is wrong. Griffo complains that the definition of racism that involves how one sees and reacts to someone who is different has been replaced with the concept of racism as power as exhibited in a society's systems. What Griffo does not realize is that in its redefinition of racism, CRT does not replace racial prejudice, what Griffo would call racism, with power, it adds to it. So, according to CRT, racism consists of both racial prejudice and social and institutional power. 

To quote from a CRT document that tries to define racism (click here for that document):

  • Racism = race prejudice + social and institutional power
  • Racism = a system of advantage based on race 
  • Racism = a system of oppression based on race 
  • Racism = a white supremacy system 

So while Griffo complains about how CRT completely redefines racism by taking out the individual's reaction to people from other races,  the first of the above 4 statements contradicts his claim. For CRT says that race or racial prejudice is:

'An attitude based on limited information, often on stereotypes. Prejudice is usually, but not always, negative. Positive and negative prejudices alike, especially when directed toward oppressed people, are damaging because they deny the individuality of the person. In some cases, the prejudices of oppressed people (“you can’t trust the police”) are necessary for survival. No one is free of prejudice.'

Thus we see that CRT states that there are two parts to racism: an individual's part and a structural component. So we can conclude that CRT does not completely redefine racism nor does it completely replace individual sin with power issues.

Another point we should make about the above CRT statements about racism is that they are speaking from the perspective of the American experience in general, and from the experiences of marginalized, oppressed people in particular. Can Griffo say that his view is includes the experiences and perspectives of the marginalized and oppressed?

One final point we should make about the above statements on racism is that it is understandable to see why CRT states that only whites can be guilty of racism. Here we should again note that CRT is not saying that only whites can be racially prejudiced. Rather, it is saying that because  the power structures of society favor the white race along with its definition of racism, only whites can be guilty of racism. Again, that is not claiming that only whites can be racially prejudiced.

From here, one can see that one of Griffo's main objections to CRT becomes the concept of corporate guilt. Corporate guilt would be a state that people have after being involved in corporate sin. And corporate sin is sin that is committed via social and institutional power. Thus, corporate sin is sins created by groups regardless of their size. And in the case of racism, corporate sin is committed by the state and society. Such a concept is sometimes difficult for Protestants, especially religiously conservative Protestants to understand because of Protestantism's emphasis on the individual accountability. For many religiously conservative Protestants question how could God legitimately hold someone accountable for the sins of another? Thus it is sometimes deduced that corporate guilt, with its cause being corporate sin, cannot exist in God's eyes. 

And yet, doesn't experience teach us about the reality of corporate sin? Didn't the Jim Crow culture and laws as well as slavery in this nation teach us about the existence of corporate sin? Didn't the Nazi atrocities in Germany teach us about the existence of corporate sin? And again, doesn't corporate guilt follow corporate sin?

But even if we were to go to the Scriptures about corporate guilt, doesn't Paul in his letter to the Romans, tell us that we have been, and are, punished for the sin of one man and blessed because of the righteousness of Christ (Romans 5:16-17). Doesn't the story of Achan in Joshua 7 tell us about Achan's family being punished for Achan's sin? Doesn't Daniel lament over the sins of Israel's ancestors as well as the sins of his contemporaries? And don't the Old Testament prophets sometimes denounce the corporate sins of both Israel and its neighbors?

Finally, Griffo's characterization about CRT being about vengeance and coveting misses the mark because there is no context provided for what CRT wants to accomplish. Is it envy and covetous to desire the basic necessities of life that others have? Is it vengeance to demand that those who have been oppressing one's own group receive justice for that oppression?

I am not sure if Griffo is aware that part of CRT is based on Martin Luther King's struggles and reactions. What Griffo seems to be inadequately aware of are the struggles that many marginalized people must face on a daily basis. 

And though certainly not perfect in its depiction and analysis of racism, CRT does provide some fresh insights as to what many marginalized people regularly experience. To battle racism, we not only must confront the views and prejudices held onto by individuals, we must change society's systems and culture from one that has employed a race-based hierarchy of people to one that recognizes and guards the equality of each person. And that unless we start to identify and seek to change those systems, our battle against racism will be wholly inadequate even though we seek to change the views of each individual. For speaking to the personal views of individuals alone only deals with overt racism. It isn't until we change our systems that we start to address racism that is hidden from our own eyes.



 

 

 


2 comments:

bud jamison said...

Sir: you posted
"In addition, CRT is speaking to a specific, gravely immoral problem that has plagued America since its beginning: racism. To use the word 'gravely' is not hyperbole since many people have been murdered because of this problem. And thus it seems that while Griffo notes similarities between CRT and religion, he fails to pay adequate attention to the differences between them."
Here are the homicide rates in the USA by race from the FBI
year 2016
White victims: 3499 Black offenders: 533
Black victims: 2870 White offenders: 243
year 2017
WV: 3567 BO: 576
BV: 2970 WO: 264
year 2018
WV: 3315 BO: 514
BV: 2915 WO: 234

Obviously black Americans are killing white Americans at a much higher rate than white Americans are killing black Americans. So if your concern is, as you state, not man's "vertical" relationship to God, but the 'horizontal' relationship between people of different races, your concern should be black against white racism, instead of the reverse, which obviously has been grossly overestimated and fuels the current CRT mania (irrespective of whether it is a religion or something other than one).

Curt Day said...

Bud,
First, I am sorry about the delay in posting your comment. I had not check the comments for a while partly due because of my personal schedule.

Second selective filtering of statistics only shows partisanship. To put those statistics in context, what the FBI stats show is that a vast majority of Black victims of murder are killed by Blacks and the vast majority of White murder victims are killed by Whites. And when you put your stats in percentage, then the percentage difference is roughly 7-8 percent.

But context is needed. How many more white people are there in this nation than Blacks? The percentage of Blacks in our nation is around 13.5%. So what is the percentage of white people in our nation? The answer that question is around 76.3%. That means that there are 5.5 times more Whites in this nation than Blacks. And yet, aren't Blacks being killed at a disproportionately higher rate than are Whites?

If you go to other crime statistics, as I remember doing for 2018, you will find that most kinds of crimes are committed by more Whites than Blacks. In addition, the only variable being consider here is race. The economic class of both the victims and the perpetrators is not being considered. This makes our discussion about murder racist to a degree.

My point here is that the statistics you cited are insufficient for arriving at any conclusions about race. For that matter, so are mine. We need more information before we can make any firm conclusions.