Monday, May 09, 2016

RAAN and "Christian" Critical Race Theory

It has been some time since the so-called Reformed organization RAAN (Reformed African-American Network) published a hit piece against Dr. James R. White falsely accusing him of racism. At that time, part of Dr. White's response to such slander was to talk about the racialist lens which RAAN possesses and thus their view of a "Christian" version of Critical Race Theory (CRT). At that time, I was focusing on how RAAN lied about Dr. White and how they are practically saying that blacks or African Americans do not have to obey God's moral law. While I did google critical race theory, being trained in the hard sciences, the entire concept of critical race theory struck me as being so ludicrous that it was hard for me to even conceive that sane people would actually hold to such nonsense.

Cue RAAN for being so kind as to show their hand for all the world to see. In a recent article by Jarvis Williams, critical race theory comes to the forefront, complete with a definite attack on the idea of color-blindness. It was so outrageous that I couldn't believe for a while what I was reading. Color-blindness is the position that one should not treat another person differently just because of the amount of melanin in their skin. So since RAAN is against color-blindness, I guess they are FOR treating people differently depending on the amount of melanin in their skin. What is different however is that they insist on being treated better because of their skin color, as opposed to worse as in 19th century American chattel slavery.

The entire piece has virtually nothing from Scripture in it, and basically is a liberal sociological rant. In the 4th point where the author attacks color-blindness, the author claims that color-blindness is discrimination against blacks, which is funny since the whole point of color-blindness is to NOT discriminate based upon skin melanin content. The author shifts from the issue of color to the issue of culture, which shows only that he is confusing and conflating categories. "Race" is NOT the same as culture! If a white guy had trouble communicating with a black guy, it might be an issue of culture, not "race." Perhaps the author Jarvis Williams might want to take a trip OUTSIDE the United States to realize that there are many cultures around the world and the differences between them are not due to "race"!

But then we might ask, is there such a thing as a "white culture" of sorts? I will not dispute that. But let's just ask a question: Is it fair for a member of the minority culture to demand the majority change their culture just because he doesn't like feeling like a minority? Since when do the rights of the minority override the rights of the majority? But then you might ask: how are we to get along? Perhaps the key to getting along is to begin by acknowledging that the minority has no right to demand the majority give up parts of their culture just to suit them! By all means, preserve your culture, but allow others to live with theirs too! Do not attempt to make them become you, but exists side by side and attempt to learn how to love each other despite cultural differences.

The problem of course is that RAAN and all those that hold to CRT do not want to live with the tension. Their demand for multi-ethnic churches is a demand for minority cultures to reign supreme while white cultures are discarded. That is the exact opposite of the definition of "multi-ethnicity." It is reverse racism against whites, which, even if some deserve it, is unjust, discriminatory, and wicked.

This RAAN article is better titled "How to create a church which embraces all cultures except white culture," for that is what it amounts to. It calls for inclusion of everyone, except whites who refuse to deny their own culture. It preaches love and tolerance, except for whites who want to preserve their culture who are not to be tolerated. The sad thing is that CRT is a self-perpetuating deception. One writes a hit piece promoting CRT, those who are called to deny their culture reject it, and their rejection is taken as proof of the vestiges of racism which CRT predicts. Nevermind that the original hit piece just insulted whites who are not ashamed of their own culture. Does anyone wonder why many whites have developed some level of antagonism towards minorities, even if they were not racist to begin with? CRT provokes backlash and creates division in society, which is then used to justify more CRT. In the meantime, true love and fellowship between believers of different ethnicities forever remain a mirage, for how can a theory that divides people according to "race" bring them together again?

So no, color-blindness is still the best way forward, the biblical ideal that all should strive towards. The way towards peace and fellowship is to stop demanding special treatment based upon CRT, and accept equality in all respects. And when a real racist situation presents itself, call the other party to repentance and the Gospel, not to bludgeon them with CRT and thus exacerbating the situation.

ADD: The article calls whites to learn how "non-white people view reality." I think I get what the author is saying, which is to understand their viewpoints. But we are not interested in how people view reality. Reality is reality, and not all viewpoints are correct. Just because non-whites see something differently does not mean they are necessarily right, even on matters of grievances.


Ken Abbott said...

Nicely done, Daniel. The problem with CRT is its grounding in Marxism; this doesn't come out so much in the linked Wikipedia article on CRT itself, but is acknowledged in the back-linked article on critical theory in general. Marxism and Christianity make very poor bedfellows, all the efforts of some to put them together notwithstanding.

Daniel C said...

Hi Ken,

thanks. Yes, they are linked, but we need to be cautious since some people may not recognize the link and so may not think they are Marxists.