Doug Vande Griend

It would seem that the author of this article and I have a pretty significant disagreement about the value and even the definition of Critical Race Theory, one branch of Critical Theory (e.g., Critical Gender Theory being another).

I wrote an article on Critical Race Theory some time ago that can be found here: https://reformedeveryday.com/featured-article/f/critical-race-theory-the-church?blogcategory=Critical+Race+Theory

Thanks much for the book review and commentary John.  Much needed.

Responding to your question, "Is the CRCNA providing a wide range of reading materials on this subject [of Critical Race Theory]?", I don't know that it has provided any range of reading materials on the subject but rather has given the impression that it acquiesces in much of  what CRT represents.  There have been Banner reviews (by contributors) of books like Ibram X. Kendi's  How to be an Antiracist, and Robin DiAngelo's White Fragility, both reviews largely favorable.  I had read both of the aforesaid books myself and was quite dismayed at the reviews in the Banner, but even more dismayed that, again from what I have seen, CRT has received no negative review at all from official CRCNA agencies or departments.  To the contrary, my sense is that of unqualified acquiescence.

I personally regard CRT, as represented by authors like Kendi, to represent serious heresy, not so much unlike the heresy of kinism (which a recent synod as so declared), except much broader in what it represents, and thus perhaps much worse.  But from what I can tell, the CRCNA push back to CRT is non-existent.

Kudos to you Kristen for having the courage to be "up front" about the perspectives of those in charge of Network content.  

Sadly, I think the perspectives that have so prevailed are destructive ones.  Robin DiAngelo (whose book, White Fragility, I have read) would be quite in agreement with everything you have said here.  Respectfully, that is not a compliment.  I have lived for about 66 years now.  No one could have convinced me 20 years ago that in 20 years, the North American culture would have moved this far to being genuinely racist (by the old definition of course, not the new definition -- again, see DiAngelo's book) and racially segregationist.  I suspect you may disagree with me, but I'm not at all alone in that perspective, including within the CRC.  

If you've never watched them, you should check out the many videos available on-line about the happenings of Evergreen College (near Olympia, WA) a number of years back.  The CRCNA, including the Network, has moved significantly in that direction (Critical Race Theory and other Critical Theory "thinking").

The CRC declared Kinism a heresy in 2019.  Critical Race Theory is no a heresy.  The difference is that CRC/CT will do more damage to the CRC than Kinism would have ever done.   

Mark Stephenson: You say of your friends' reluctance to comment or post on the Network, "... I would call it wisdom of not going where you know you are not wanted nor welcome."

Wow.  Those in power over the Network encourage your friends -- but yet they remain disinclined to post or comment -- but you discourage others who do contribute by deleting and censoring articles and comments -- but they engage with you and continue (although much less in my case) to post articles and comments.

Say and claim what you like, it seems pretty clear that those few who control the Network simply don't like views that too much depart from their own.  

After all, exactly who is it in this scenario that has quite explicitly been told "... you are not wanted nor welcome"?

A thousand amens!  There is no better way, whether as a local church, a family, or individual, to be salt and light than by being just that where you are, locally.

I would add this point to this article.  If we would resist the urge to move from our neighborhoods to live in a "nicer one" or one with "better schools" or because our neighborhood "is changing for the worse", but instead resolve to be part of our neighborhood's continuing effort to improve, we would become an enormous change agent, first for our own neighborhood, but also in aggregate for our cities, states and country. 

Bottom up is so much more effective than top down, as well as so much more within what we can actually accomplish.

Sorry, but this article uses racist arguments to attack racism.  Either race is a core component or who people are or not.  Count me on the "not" side, consistently, unlike this article which laments racism on the one hand but then embraces it (even demands or at least encourages it) on the other.

I read this book a year or more ago.  Well worth the read.  Essentially, the author argues for the implementation of "classical political liberalism" (which is what "sphere sovereignty" essentially represents) in a country (the Netherlands) that has for some decades now largely abandoned the thinking of Kuyper.

"People aren't looking to the church for political commentary."

A great Amen to that!  And yet, the CRC does it, as well as political lobbying, in spades.  And it has and will have the divis effect suggested by this article.

This and your prior blog article are great Lisa, as is your work.  These are indeed difficult issues with difficulty questions, but a great opportunity, even if also a great challenge, for the church, both institutionally and organically.

I live down the road (I-5) from you (Salem Oregon) and my office is downtown.  I see and work with the same as you, though quantitatively less (smaller city).

I thank you for your commitment and effort.

Hello