Two basic problems arise in any conversation involving critical theory: (1) finding a consistent, fair representation from its advocates or critics and (2) sifting through the complex jargon to understand what the honest representation means so responsible critique can take place.
Critical Dilemma: The Rise of Critical Theories and Social Justice Ideology––Implications for the Church and Society attempts to address both of these problems. Neil Shenvi earned a PhD in theoretical chemistry and has invested his recent years in the study of critical theory. Pat Sawyer is a lecturer in communication studies at UNC Greensboro and holds a PhD in education studies and cultural studies.
This is a long book, at nearly 500 pages. The heft is largely due to the complexity of the authors’ goals. Shenvi and Sawyer state a desire to explain “bad ideas [some Christians have] embraced” that “have been penetrating more and more deeply into our culture” (30).
They contend these ideas often lead to deconstruction, theological liberalism, and other unhealthy attitudes toward the faith. They “want to show Christians that the Bible offers better answers to questions about race, class, gender, sexuality, justice, oppression, and a host of other hot-button issues” (30).
Critical Dilemma: The Rise of Critical Theories and Social Justice Ideology―Implications for the Church and Society
Neil Shenvi and Pat Sawyer
Critical Dilemma: The Rise of Critical Theories and Social Justice Ideology―Implications for the Church and Society
Neil Shenvi and Pat Sawyer
Critical theory and its expression in fields such as critical race theory, critical pedagogy, and queer theory are having a profound impact on our culture. Contemporary critical theory’s ideas about race, class, gender, identity, and justice have dramatically shaped how people think, act, and view one another—in Christian and secular spheres alike.
Drawing on exhaustive research and careful analysis, Shenvi and Sawyer condemn racism, urge Christians to seek justice, and offer a path forward for racial healing and unity while also opposing critical theory’s manifold errors.
Incandescent Arguments
Fights over critical theory often produce more heat than light.
Recent debates among evangelicals have made it clear to me that many of the most vocal critics have little or no understanding of CRT. Before you can honestly critique an idea, you have to understand it. The first half of Critical Dilemma takes up that task.
Before you can honestly critique an idea, you have to understand it.
In their efforts to adequately explain critical theory, Shenvi and Sawyer explore two specific types: CRT and queer theory. This section could have been a book in itself. The authors interact largely with primary sources and favorable secondary sources in their attempt to honestly represent academic theories often characterized by their proponents as being impossible to define.
I’m no expert in critical theory, in the sense that I don’t write academically on the subject. But I’ve read enough primary literature to have a fair grasp of critical theory and a better understanding of CRT, but little comprehension of queer theory.
Overall, Shenvi and Sawyer have captured the basic ideas of at least critical theory and CRT. Because of their success in the areas I know, I’m willing to give them the benefit of the doubt regarding queer theory.
Some scholars will disagree with certain representations of those theories in this book. In part, that’s what academics do. Some of the disagreements will have more validity than others. These are complex ideas with substantial variations among adherents, so it’s unlikely any single presentation will satisfy everyone.
Responsible Critiques
The second half of the book is a critique of critical theories. It would have been possible to write a book that simply offers this critique. Others have done so. But this book is most valuable because the turn to evaluation comes after the careful work of understanding.
Critical Dilemma offers a nuanced approach to topics that often lead to bombastic claims from Christian supporters and detractors of critical theories. The authors have made it clear they’re ideological opponents of critical theories. Yet they offer a chapter on the truths to be found in such theories.
Proponents of critical theories are clearly not going to like the critiques offered within this book. But neither will those who support colorblindness find comfort in its pages. Though I’m not a proponent of critical theory, I fear that books critiquing it may be used as weapons against those attempting to address institutional racism. A careless reading of Critical Dilemma might lead some to such faulty conclusions, but a thorough engagement won’t.
One of the strengths of this volume is that it undermines perspectives from the right and the left that argue critical theories are either totally correct or wholly destructive. The book reflects my larger critique of critical theory, which is that it’s often effective at revealing problems in our society, but the solutions it offers have largely failed. This nuance is one of the best qualities of the book.
Potential Missteps
Despite its value, there are missteps in Shenvi and Sawyer’s critique.
For example, the authors criticize critical theory advocates for rejecting universal laws and hierarchy as hegemonic. Many critical theorists argue that “dominant social groups impose their values on society such that they are accepted as natural, normal, or even God-ordained” (92). From this standpoint, institutions like the nuclear family and natural law or religious arguments for public policy are deemed oppressive. Shenvi and Sawyer note that Scripture affirms both universal moral law and some forms of hierarchy. Thus, they argue that in some sense “the Bible itself functions as hegemonic discourse” (290). They’re right, but the primary concerns of the critical theorists are human laws, rather than supernatural. To some degree they are talking past the critical theorists.
The authors are also too quick to declare Martin Luther King Jr. a close ally to their cause related to the question of law and the universal moral law. They write, “King’s entire argument fundamentally contradicts CRT’s perspective” (327). King’s perspective contrasts with some aspects of CRT, especially because he recognizes law can be and often is based on a universal moral order. However, he was critical of some laws, recognizing that sometimes the law can be used by the majority to inflict pain on the minority. This perspective in some ways resonates with the original legal analysis of CRT. There is value in this discussion for Critical Dilemma, but it is an example of the authors painting with a bit too broad a brush.
Finally, I wasn’t convinced by their case in chapter 11 against a role for collective, ancestral guilt. This concept can be misused by activists, but too quickly dismissing the social relevance of historical racial injustice can create barriers to reconciliation. Shenvi and Sawyer are correct to note that moral guilt is resolved for each individual through Christ alone. However, in Scripture we see God’s judgment of all Israel for Achan’s sin (Josh. 7) and Daniel’s confession of the ancestral sin of his people (Dan. 9). A deeper conversation about collective guilt, especially in social terms, needs to take place to understand what role it may, or may not, play in race relations.
Worthy of Commendation
Even with these challenges, Critical Dilemma is a commendable book. It can give Christians a common footing to have a better dialogue on issues connected to critical theories.
Critical Dilemma offers a nuanced approach to topics that often lead to bombastic claims from Christian supporters and detractors of critical theories.
The book’s nuance encourages discussion. It allows us to learn about the different concerns people bring to these important issues. It helps us to engage in a careful understanding of opposing views that can help us to navigate some of our differences.
It’s not easy to take the complicated ideas within various critical theories and distill them for an educated but nonacademic audience. The authors largely accomplish that task, although some passages may be confusing to the layperson.
Their honest attempt and reasonable success in providing fair, accessible explanations of ambiguous academic theories make this a valuable volume—whether you support or oppose critical theories, whether you’re well read or not, and whether you have influence in the Christian community or you’re unknown. If you want to be part of the conversation within the church on critical theories, this is an important book.
I hope we build off this information to find solutions we can live with instead of the recriminations that so often characterize our discussions on issues of identity and oppression.
