Christianity and Critical Race Theory: A Faithful and Constructive Conversation

Christianity and Critical Race Theory: A Faithful and Constructive Conversation

Robert Chao Romero and Jeff M. Liou

Published by Baker Academic in 2023

208pp / $23.99 / 978-1540965196

Amazon

Goodreads

One of the stranger subplots of the racial reckoning that followed the killing of George Floyd in 2020 was the controversy that emerged around the rather esoteric set of ideas known as critical race theory (CRT). While elements of CRT had worked their way into the 21^st century DEI programs of universities, governments and corporate America, critical theory itself garnered little attention outside of academic circles. That changed with a more explicit mainstreaming of CRT as part of the intense anti-racism efforts that followed Floyd’s death.

At the Christian liberal arts college where I teach, our president responded to the Floyd killing by publicly decreeing the formation of a Racial Equity Steering Committee to attack “the issues of systemic and structural racism” and to do so “using an anti-racist and critical race theory framework.” His message echoed an earlier email from our then-chief diversity officer to faculty and staff explicitly committing to a critical race theory frame to advance racial justice on campus.

With the backlash to CRT that manifested itself in widespread state-level legislative prohibitions came an animated debate among Christian thinkers and pastors over whether the underlying principles of CRT could be squared with a biblically based approach to racial justice. Those weighing in included Tim Keller and John Piper, Carl Trueman and Jemar Tisby. Rasool Berry and Esau McCaulley, and countless others, though the debate was largely confined to journal articles, blog posts, and podcast conversations.

With Christianity and Critical Race Theory: A Faithful and Constructive Conversation, Robert Chao Romero (Professor of Chicana/o Studies, UCLA) and Jeff Liou (National Director of Theological Formation, Intervarsity) were among the first to offer a book length treatment of the subject. In response to the essential question to which the book is directed, namely the compatibility of CRT and Christianity, both authors answer in the affirmative. Romero sees “many of the big tenets of CRT lin[ing] up squarely with the teachings of Jesus and Scripture,” (12-13) a view shared by his co-author. (“We believe that a faithful and constructive engagement with CRT illuminates significant overlaps with Christian theology.”) (21)

At the heart of CRT is the charge that U.S. law and policy are manipulated in order to “preserve privilege for those considered ‘white’ at the expense of those who are people of color.” (7) Drawing on Delgado’s pioneering work on CRT, Romero lays down its key tenets: (1) the belief that racism is ordinary and pervasive, the “common everyday experience of most people of color”; (2) interest convergence, or the notion that white people are only motivated to fight racism when it serves their material self-interest; (3) race as a social construct without biological or genetic reality; and (4) the “voice of color thesis,” which emphasizes the unique experiences of people of color that qualify them to speak authoritatively on racism in ways whites cannot. (9-10). 

In framing their argument, the authors employ the classic biblical narrative of creation, fall, redemption, and consummation. In the opening chapter on creation, they compellingly write of the beauty of the unique cultural gifts possessed by every ethnic group that is a defining aspect of God’s all-nations, all-peoples kingdom. (35) That beauty is marred by a “cultural deficit” lens that diminishes, and at times overlooks altogether, the contributions of marginalized ethnic groups. The fall of creation which is responsible for the sin of racism is evident not only in the long history of slavery, Jim Crow segregation, anti-miscegenation laws, racially restrictive housing covenants, redlining and immigration policy, but also in the deep inequities across racial lines that persist into the present around health care, poverty rates and generational wealth, educational achievement, rates of imprisonment, and more. (65-67) It is the rooting of those contemporary socio-economic, legal and political inequities in the history of race-based discrimination that the authors refer to as “systemic sin.” (56) The refusal to accept at face value the reality of the ordinariness of racism in American society is to be deaf to “the cries of those who experienced racism.” (94) Those stubborn disparities and the “racialized attitudes, systems, and structures” responsible for them should move every Christians to repent and commit to ways of honoring and integrating the diversity of cultural wisdom and perspectives that mark God’s kingdom. 

I found the embedding of CRT in a biblical frame helpful and persuasive, as a means of diagnosing the racial ills that plague us, both in the church and in broader society. The principles of CRT informed by a biblical narrative of creation and sin provide a common theological language for more constructively grappling with a racialized society and its root causes within and across Christian communities. 

The authors’ pivot to CRT as a prescription for moving forward takes them into more contestable territory. In an attempt to make the case for CRT as a constructive path forward to building unity in Christian communities and institutions, Romero and Liou offer a diluted form of CRT that is more appealing but which defines away some of its more problematic aspects. I found myself frequently nodding in agreement with certain emphases of CRT that could significantly enrich and deepen Christian conversation around racial problems. But too often CRT is wielded as a totalizing doctrine which brooks little dissent. When done so, it leaves little room for the Christian virtues of charity, intellectual humility, and grace that are essential to building Christian community across the racial divide.

Take for example the “voices of color” thesis, which rightly elevates the experiences of those minorities whose voices have too often been ignored or shunted to the side. Who can argue with Romero’s proclamation that “we Christians of color form distinctive parts of the body of Christ and uniquely reflect the image of God.” (109) We fellow Christians cannot close off our hearts and minds to those voices, too long silenced, through whom we can genuinely understand the reality of ongoing racial injustice in America. Those voices of color are central to realizing genuine empathy and motivation to act. The appropriate Christian response often is to forgo a strict interrogation of the claims of racism in favor of quietly sharing in the anger, pain and weariness of those on the receiving end of racism.

But practitioners of CRT routinely go further in denying empirical methods or objectives as “social construct[s] created to suite the purposes of the dominant group.” (142) As a Christian political scientist, I have never accepted the bifurcation of faith and science, but rather see the array of social scientific methods as one of God’s gifts to humanity for discerning the working of His creation in all its glory. One can cultivate a special sensitivity to the voices and lived experiences of those on the margins without abandoning objective efforts to better understand causes of, and solutions to, their plight. Indeed Christian academics arguably have a special calling to employ as rigorously as possible all tools at their disposal in an effort to aid in the flourishing of all. William Murrell puts it well. CRT can help me fully grasp the ongoing disparities that exist so strikingly along racial lines. But it ought not to bar a richer and more nuanced exploration of ALL the complex considerations that contribute to those inequities.

Another example of the wishing away of the more divisive elements of CRT is the authors’ omission of intersectionality. That principle, embraced by most proponents of CRT, creates something of a scale of marginalization, with axes of oppression that extend beyond race to include gender, disability, sexual orientation, and the like. Importing LGBTQ concerns under the banner of CRT clearly raises significant concerns for Christians with a more traditional sexual ethic, and merits attention if we are to take CRT seriously.

The titular goal of a “faithful and constructive conversation” around CRT also is weakened by the authors’ tendency to caricature their intellectual opponents and their arguments. Indeed, the lack of charity toward those with differing views I found jarring, particularly when the authors invoke scripture in their cause. Critics of CRT assert claims that are “deliberately and deceitfully overblown . . .” (137) They cling “to sources that confirm their bias. To make themselves feel better, they then sling mud and vitriol . . .” (172) Pot, say hello to the kettle!

The potentially divisive nature of conversations around race in the church and in other Christian institutions places special obligations on participants in those conversations. On one hand, it requires a particular clarity and precision in the language, assertions and arguments being put forth. Even more importantly, it compels a special measure of generosity and goodwill in how one interprets the words and motives of one’s conversation partners. CRT falls short on both ends; it relies on a kind of cant that obfuscates more than it clarifies, while falling back on a reductionist binary of oppressor and oppressed that is disunifying at its core.

Romero and Liou are clearly frustrated with the lack of tangible progress in achieving ethnic and racial diversity among faith-identified institutions – colleges, seminaries, and non-profits – and rightly so. But to simply assert with little support that such spaces are afflicted with “Christian nationalism” (172) and have “little problem with the lack of cultural diversity that characterizes leadership in Christian higher education” (129) are risible claims that hardly engender constructive discourse. They offer a crude straw man of color blindness, which they caricature as holding that . . .

We should no longer consider color or ethnic heritage as a factor in employment, educational admissions or government contracts, because we are all the same . . . racism is a thing of the past and no longer exists on a structural or systemic level in our churches, seminaries, colleges, public education system, health care system, or elsewhere. Where it does exist, it’s usually against whites as reverse discrimination. (122)

Most people I know who resist race-based preferences are quick to admit to ongoing racism in American society; they hardly think “we all are the same” and acknowledge the desirability of diversity. One can reject color blindness as a sociological descriptor while questioning the use of race-based preferences in the legal or policy context, particularly when they see it being applied arbitrarily to favor some racial groups over others (for example, Asian-Americans who bear the brunt of the cost of race preferences in the context of university admissions). Ironically, these charges come in the chapter on consummation as part of a discussion of how best to realize Dr. Martin Luther King’s vision of the Beloved Community. The views of the critics of CRT are admittedly controvertible, and warrant careful scrutiny. But they also deserve to be fairly articulated and confronted in an intellectually honest way.

The discussion of the Beloved Community takes on a bit of a dual personality, as the authors part ways on the ultimate path forward. Romero remains a mostly uncritical advocate of CRT while co-author Liou is more guarded. He finds CRT’s “gloomy eschaton” at odds with the biblical prophetic tradition and King’s emphasis on spiritual and moral transformation through the person and work of Jesus Christ. Take for example the scriptural exhortation to participate in Christ’s ministry of reconciliation (I Corinthians 5:18). CRT’s strident ideological bent has led its purveyors to explicitly reject racial reconciliation as a laudable goal [Romero speaks dismissively of “cheap grace and reconciliation” (171)]. But there are a host of black voices who do not downplay the reality of racism but whose hopeful vision seeks ultimate answers in Christ; John Perkins, Trillia Newbell, Esau McCaulley, and George Yancey are just a few of the black pastors and theologians who anchor their passionate calls for justice in the power of the Gospel. 

In the end, I find CRT generally to have diagnostic value for our social ills. But as a prescription it cannot achieve the goal of individual and relational flourishing. Only an authentic Christian mission centered on the imago dei – the imprinting on each and every member of the community with the very image of our creator giving them inestimable worth – can provide a frame for collectively exploring the complexities of race WHILE honoring the participants in the debate whatever their status or identity.  Only through shared Christian aspirations will faith-informed places achieve a genuine, vibrantly diverse community, where the Christian virtues of grace, mercy and forgiveness can infuse our efforts to build a welcoming and authentically hospitable place. In the end, we must strive to infuse our politicking, reasoning and public discourse with Christian virtues. Extend charity in interpreting the clumsy words and motives of others. Assume the best until we have a convincing reason not to. Offer grace and forgiveness where appropriate and gentle but firm correction when necessary. Finally, we need genuine humility about our own judgments and the limits of our wisdom.