What are your thoughts re Hegelian Dialectic & CRT in the Church?

[Szdfan]

I've read this entire thread, but I'm still confused about the two central issues.

What exactly do people mean by “Hegelian Dialectic” in the context of the church? And where are people seeing significant or widespread influence of CRT in church life? I’ve seen occasional hints of it, but it still seems fairly fringe to me.

I don’t think I’ve seen a clear explanation with concrete examples in the thread so far, and I’d really appreciate any insight. Sometimes it feels like dramatic language gets used in place of actual evidence—as if just repeating a strong-sounding phrase is enough to prove the point. I’m not trying to be dismissive. If this is real, I'd really like to understand what’s being seen and how people are connecting it to what’s actually happening in churches.

An interesting thing that emerged recently was how David Platt used CRT as a tool to gain power in a church.

Oh really?

CRT is a pretty esoteric academic theory. How does one use it to gain power in a church? That's like saying someone used quantum field theory or the theory of relativity to gain power in a church.

I'm also curious how CRT was used to take control of this congregation. Would you please say more?

[temporal1]

P.6 has interesting discussion: Including the actual topic’s OP, Falco

Well, if you really want a definition of CRT here's one from the UCLA School of Public Affairs:

CRT recognizes that racism is engrained in the fabric and system of the American society. The individual racist need not exist to note that institutional racism is pervasive in the dominant culture. This is the analytical lens that CRT uses in examining existing power structures. CRT identifies that these power structures are based on white privilege and white supremacy, which perpetuates the marginalization of people of color. CRT also rejects the traditions of liberalism and meritocracy. Legal discourse says that the law is neutral and colorblind, however, CRT challenges this legal “truth” by examining liberalism and meritocracy as a vehicle for self-interest, power, and privilege. CRT also recognizes that liberalism and meritocracy are often stories heard from those with wealth, power, and privilege.

Source https://spacrs.wordpress.com/what-is-cr ... ory/#_ftn1

That should be good enough for us to work with, imo.

I'm not sure what is controversial about this. As a teacher I could take actual concrete examples from the public school system and show how every single one of these things are true.

That's would be the most culturally acceptable narrative, i think.

Voddie Baucham takes a closer look at their fundamental principles and lists these four features of the CRT worldview:

1. Racism is normative. (everywhere, unavoidable)

2. Convergence theory. (or Interest Convergence)

This means white people are incapable of righteous acts with respect to oppressed minorities unless it converges with their own interests. (This is borrowed from a law theory, I think.)

3. Antiliberalism

A rejection of Enlightenment thinking, of the idea that objective knowledge is preferable or even possible.

4. Knowledge is culturally constructed.

Rooted in Gramsci. What we have is not cultural truth but cultural hegemony. They not only speak about "White normativity but of "Christian normativity." Check your white privilege. Check your Christian privilege. (Coming soon.)

This is also where the topic of narratives become important - since there is no objective truth but knowledge is a cultural construct, and cultural constructions are a product of stories or narratives.

The only truth comes only through the stories of the marginalized.

These fundamental principles might be considered controversial by the Church.

i agree with others in the early pages who refer to black men, like, THOMAS SOWELL and VODDIE BACHAM for direction.

Also, the U.S. isn’t a huge country, but most of it was never part of the southern confederate states and never subscribed to those parts of the thinking that has been routinely passed along as being representative of ALL (accused of being white, because it is an accusation) - regardless of personal or family history, geography or any other factor. That seems pretty racist/reverse racist.

Anyway, as TS describes, much of what goes on boils down to academia patting itself on its back for being virtuous.
He has a lot to say about academia, i believe he IS a prominent academic - - not one in The Big Club.

He’s been called every racist name i’ve ever heard of.
As i understand, this is expected by conservatives who happen to be black. This should not be.

He could have been! EASILY. For money and notoriety, he could have been at the top of The Big Club.
He chose to: think critically.

Maybe he’ll begin to get deserved recognition soon? He has numerous books, decades of lectures, videos to reference.
Many prominent men did not experience full recognition in their lifetimes.

i’m now hoping to live to see TS taught in HS and universities as required study. It could happen.

[Bootstrap]

P.6 has interesting discussion: Including the actual topic’s OP, Falco

Thanks for pulling those quotes together, Temp. There’s a lot to chew on there.

That said, I think I chewed on some of this back when it was first posted, and I’m still trying to wrap my head around what people think is actually happening in churches when it comes to CRT. Could you explain it to me like I’m five? Not the theory, not the academics—just what you see happening on the ground in real church settings.

What are the specific things you’re noticing that make you say CRT is a significant influence on the church?

[Bootstrap]

Also, the U.S. isn’t a huge country, but most of it was never part of the southern confederate states and never subscribed to those parts of the thinking that has been routinely passed along as being representative of ALL (accused of being white, because it is an accusation) - regardless of personal or family history, geography or any other factor.

I don’t quite follow what you’re saying here. Not every region was part of the Confederacy, of course—but many of the attitudes and structures associated with racism have shaped life far beyond the South, through federal policy, economic systems, education, and church history.

It also sounds like you’re describing “being white” as an accusation. I’m not sure I understand that. What are you hearing in churches that makes you feel like there’s something wrong with being white? I was once part of some anti-racism training that did make me feel that way, but I am seeing a lot less of that these days. Is your church setting different from mine? I keep hearing people say they feel accused for being white. Is that something that happens to you frequently? Where? Who is accusing you in that way?

And how does this tie back to the Hegelian Dialectic or CRT showing up in the church? There's a lot of fancy academic language here, references to people like Gramsci who I have never read or thought about, etc., but I really don't understand what this thread is saying about Hegelian Dialectic and CRT in the church.

Can you explain it to me like I'm a five year old?

[Ken]

Also, the U.S. isn’t a huge country, but most of it was never part of the southern confederate states and never subscribed to those parts of the thinking that has been routinely passed along as being representative of ALL (accused of being white, because it is an accusation) - regardless of personal or family history, geography or any other factor.

I don’t quite follow what you’re saying here. Not every region was part of the Confederacy, of course—but many of the attitudes and structures associated with racism have shaped life far beyond the South, through federal policy, economic systems, education, and church history.

It also sounds like you’re describing “being white” as an accusation. I’m not sure I understand that. What are you hearing in churches that makes you feel like there’s something wrong with being white? I was once part of some anti-racism training that did make me feel that way, but I am seeing a lot less of that these days. Is your church setting different from mine? I keep hearing people say they feel accused for being white. Is that something that happens to you frequently? Where? Who is accusing you in that way?

And how does this tie back to the Hegelian Dialectic or CRT showing up in the church? There's a lot of fancy academic language here, references to people like Gramsci who I have never read or thought about, etc., but I really don't understand what this thread is saying about Hegelian Dialectic and CRT in the church.

Can you explain it to me like I'm a five year old?

There is still racism in this country and people don't like to be reminded of it.

That is all it is. All the moral panic over so-called CRT in the conservative world just boils down to those two facts.

[JohnH]

I've read this entire thread, but I'm still confused about the two central issues.

What exactly do people mean by “Hegelian Dialectic” in the context of the church? And where are people seeing significant or widespread influence of CRT in church life? I’ve seen occasional hints of it, but it still seems fairly fringe to me.

I don’t think I’ve seen a clear explanation with concrete examples in the thread so far, and I’d really appreciate any insight. Sometimes it feels like dramatic language gets used in place of actual evidence—as if just repeating a strong-sounding phrase is enough to prove the point. I’m not trying to be dismissive. If this is real, I'd really like to understand what’s being seen and how people are connecting it to what’s actually happening in churches.

An interesting thing that emerged recently was how David Platt used CRT as a tool to gain power in a church.

Oh really?

CRT is a pretty esoteric academic theory. How does one use it to gain power in a church? That's like saying someone used quantum field theory or the theory of relativity to gain power in a church.

Carp on it regularly and then denounce anyone who questions you as “racist”.

[JohnH]

An interesting thing that emerged recently was how David Platt used CRT as a tool to gain power in a church.

Oh really?

CRT is a pretty esoteric academic theory. How does one use it to gain power in a church? That's like saying someone used quantum field theory or the theory of relativity to gain power in a church.

I'm also curious how CRT was used to take control of this congregation. Would you please say more?

Go watch the documentary or read the write ups about it. It was recently referred to in the other thread.

[Ken]

Oh really?

CRT is a pretty esoteric academic theory. How does one use it to gain power in a church? That's like saying someone used quantum field theory or the theory of relativity to gain power in a church.

I'm also curious how CRT was used to take control of this congregation. Would you please say more?

Go watch the documentary or read the write ups about it. It was recently referred to in the other thread.

I read some write-ups. They made no mention of CRT whatsoever. But mostly talked about to what extent this church was affiliating or not affiliating with the Southern Baptist Convention. And it appears to mostly just be grievance airing by conservatives within that congregation who didn't want to see any change.

There was a lawsuit filed by these conservative members against David Platt's leadership which was entirely about financial mismanagement and ties to the SBC. Zero mention of CRT. And it was eventually dismissed.

[ken_sylvania]

The guy must be really old-fashioned. I thought that OLED and QLED have mostly supplanted the use of CRT.

[Ken]

The guy must be really old-fashioned. I thought that OLED and QLED have mostly supplanted the use of CRT.

Yes, people who obsess about CRT are really living in the past.