Christian
Theology vs. Critical Theory
©
2021 by Mark Driscoll
ISBN:
978-1-7374103-7-9 (Paperback)
ISBN:
978-1-7374103-8-6 (E-book)
Pages 21-22
In 1923 the Institute for
Social Research (also called the Frankfurt School, or Critical Theory) opened as the first
funded Marxist think tank. It sought to determine how to bring a utopian future
to the world because the human soul needs to have not only food, water, air,
and shelter in order to live, but also hope. Spearheaded by Jewish academics
who were anti-capitalism, they wanted to pursue justice by deconstructing and
reconstructing everything from gender to family, religion, education and more.
Despite being fringe, counterculture radicals and idealists, their concepts did
appeal to some people who were suffering and feeling a sense of injustice,
oppression, and loss amidst great poverty.
As a very general rule, Critical Theory is based upon five big
ideas:
1.
Power: Structures are created by powerful people to privilege themselves, which
is a form of abuse and injustice.
2.
Systemic Oppression: Though often invisible like demons, there are inherent
biases and prejudices built into every system by those in power to systematically
oppress those without power.
3.
Critique: It is good and right to find the flaws and problems in all systems of
thought as well as institutions, not unlike God who knows our sin and names
it.
4.
Justice: It is righteous to dismantle oppressive ideas and structures and
redistribute power and wealth for equality. Examples include eradicating
private property ownership, redistributing wealth through
reparations
or tax benefits, or attacking businesses that have benefitted from
systemic oppression, which explains rioting and looting that is cheered
as justice instead of jeered as injustice.
5.
Government: Government replaces God as the sovereign authority to bring
justice, protect peace, and provide for the needs of people who have been
oppressed. This is a counterfeit of the Kingdom of God ruled by King
Jesus who began His public ministry in Luke 4:18-21 reading from and
recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who
are oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor.’ And he rolled up
the scroll and gave it back to the attendant and sat down. And the eyes of
all in the synagogue were fixed on him. And he began to say to them, ‘Today
this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.’” To have a Kingdom that
is perfect, you need a perfect King and His name is Jesus.
In 1933, Adolf Hitler became Chancellor in Germany, and the next
year became Fuhrer with his own idea of how to achieve
a utopian society without God. Around this time, the Nazis closed the Frankfurt
school, which then moved to Geneva for a season, then Paris, eventually landing
at Columbia University in New York. From 1939-1945, starting with the invasion
of Poland, World War II gripped the globe as a demonic anti-Christ sought to
impose himself as the head of nations. Hitler enacted a plot to deconstruct
governments and reconstruct the world with himself as the King of Kings and
Lord of Lords much like Pharoah, Nebuchadnezzar, Caesar and others had done
before him by the same powerful spirit of the Critic. Tragically, the concepts
of Critical Theory developed by some Jewish scholars were used to justify the
Holocaust. Some Germans concluded that the Jews used their power to create
systemic oppression and so the Nazis critiqued the Jews and brought social
justice through the government by seizing Jewish property, enslaving and
murdering Jewish people, and destroying Jewish businesses in the name of social
justice. Yes, perhaps the greatest racial/ethnic injustice in modern history
was in the name of social justice based upon the principles of Critical Theory.
There’s a lot that could be
said about the above-quoted passage, but let’s start with the most basic
point. The Institute for Social Research
wouldn’t have been the first Marxist think tank the world over. The Marx-Engels Institute that eventually became
the Marx-Engels-Lenin Institute was a think tank that was founded in 1919. Now
if we said that the first Marxist think tank in the West was founded in 1923 with the Institute for Social Research
then, okay, we can grant that point but that is not the point Driscoll made.
But all of that is to raise the
question about where might Driscoll have gotten the idea that the Frankfurt
School was the first Marxist think
tank? You might think that for such a
categorical and sweeping claim as describing the Frankfurt School as the first
Marxist think tank there’d be a single footnote of attribution but Driscoll’s
bibliographic citations are sparser than ever.
Nevertheless, he gave us a clue
a while back.
https://www.facebook.com/pastormark/photos/side-study-this-week-to-prep-for-romans-2-/10158631698491912/
Mark
Driscoll
September
30, 2020 ·
Side
study this week to prep for Romans 2
What's that book in the lower right corner? Stephen Eric
Bronner’s Critical Theory: A Very Short
Introduction. So we know beyond all doubt Driscoll showed the world he had the book as part of his side study for a sermon, so what’s the author have to say about the start of the Institute for Social Research?
https://global.oup.com/academic/product/critical-theory-a-very-short-introduction-9780190692674?cc=us&lang=en&
Critical
Theory: A Very Short Introduction
Copyright ©
2011 by Stephen Eric Bronner
Published by
Oxford University Press, Inc.
ISBN: 978-0-19-973007-0 (paperback)
ISBN: 978-0-19-0692674
Page 9
The Institute for Social Research was founded in 1923. Growing out of a
Marxist study group, which sought to deal with the practical problems facing
the labor movement in the aftermath of the Russian Revolution, this first
Marxist think tank was funded by Hermann Weil. He was an enlightened business
man, who made his fortune on the grain market in Argentina. The money was given
at the urging of his son, Felix, who considered himself a “salon Bolshevik”
So that could have been a footnote as
best as I can tell. Did Driscoll think that showing off the books he was reading on social media would count toward a footnote in Christian Theology vs Critical Theory?
Now as for how and why the Frankfurt School
developed, it would be more accurate to say that what the founders were trying
to understand was how the Russian Revolution devolved into a bloodbath on the
one hand and how bids at communist revolution not only failed in Germany but
led to the emergence of National Socialism on the other. Deconstructionism wouldn’t
even become an academic trend until decades after the members of the Frankfurt
School had emigrated to the United States to assist in researching potential
explanations for the rise of fascism a la The
Authoritarian Personality. Driscoll’s use of “deconstruct” as a buzzword is
a dog whistle. What hath Adorno to do
with Derrida?
Driscoll can write about King Jesus
but didn’t Jesus say “My kingdom is not of this world?” Hasn’t Driscoll
mentioned in the past that Western Christendom has died? If critical theory is supposed to be a
counterfeit gospel and a counterfeit to the Kingdom of God what exactly “is”
that kingdom in Mark Driscoll’s mind?
Western Christendom?
Confessions of a Reformission Rev
Mark Driscoll,
Zondervan 2006
ISBN-13:
978-0-310-27016-4
ISBN-10:0-310-27016-2
Pages 16-17
During the era of Christendom, it was
generally believed that our national culture was Christian, or at least
Judeo-Christian. Consequently, it was the job of the church to make converts
for the nation by challenging people to commit themselves to Jesus and live
morally. The upside of Chrisendom was that many people did attend church. The
downside was that the church in large part became the servant of morality and
the national good. The result was a mean-spirited hypocrisy among “Christians”
who wrongly believed morality and redemption were synonymous and lived lives
more dominated by American values of pride and selfishness than by the gospel virtues
of humility and selflessness. Also, Christendom
churches defined themselves in contrast to other competing churches, which led
to unnecessary hostility between Christian traditions that were distinct but
not altogether different.
By 2013’s A Call to Resurgence, Driscoll spoke of the death of Christendom as
complete. Now in 2021 Driscoll refers to
the death of Christendom as a slow process that happened in the past and that
he called, it seems, the time of death. Thus in Christian Theology vs Critical Theory:
page 38
Like many deaths, the final demise of Christendom occurred after a
long, painful struggle that
started in the 1960s and 1970s as I described in my book A Call to
Resurgence. Christendom took a serious beating during those years from the
fatal five: gender confusion, sex, abortions, drugs, and Spiritless
spirituality. Strength and vigor waned as Christendom grew old and tired in the
1980s and 1990s; by the turn of the millennium, it could no longer fight back.
Finally, after more than a decade of labored breathing and a weakening heart,
Christendom has gone the way of all flesh.
But before we move forward into a future without Christendom, it’s
important to look back
to see where we’ve come from. What exactly is Christendom, how is it
different from Christianity itself, and how does it relate to the church today?
Christendom began about the time of the
Reformation and lasted roughly 500
years. The United States was among the most adventurous experiments of
Christendom. …
…
Page 40
Due to the ongoing existence of American civil religion, many
evangelicals are oblivious to the
fact that Christendom is dead and real Christianity is in serious decline.
Those in the United States may have a general sense that Christianity is
struggling in Europe, but many remain fairly optimistic about our “one nation
under God.” As long as we see Christmas trees on government property, the 10
Commandments posted on public buildings, and hear public figures talk about
“faith,” many believers naively assume that real Christianity is alive and well
and respected by the majority of our people.
Brace yourself. It’s an illusion.
It would seem that gone altogether are Driscoll’s earlier hopeful
observations about how the death of Christendom could signal the demise of
merely nominal professions of faith:
Page 42
With the death of Christendom, however, the
cultural advantages of Christianity have
diminished, and many people have decided to drop the charade altogether. This
shouldn’t come as a surprise; without inward conversion there’s no reason to
expect outward devotion. Younger generations increasingly feel less obligated
even to profess Christianity, and society increasingly provides less incentive
to do so. The advent of mass media, digital communication, and global travel
have made competing religions, spiritualities, and philosophies (including
agnosticism and atheism) more acceptable and fashionable. In contrast,
Christendom is the old way, led by old people for old people. It’s no wonder
young people stop attending church, stop giving to the church, and stop
practicing faith through Bible reading, a lifestyle of repentance, and passion
for Jesus Christ.
He says that as though it’s a bad thing. What
happened to the Mark Driscoll who wrote that the demise of Christendom meant
less hypocrisy and nominalism? What happened to the Driscoll who was willing to
say that nationalistic civic religion was not something Christianity ought to
have underwritten as seemed to be the case even back in 2006 with Confessions of a Reformission Rev?
Of course Driscoll’s very definition of “Christendom”
is a debatable definition. The idea that Christendom didn’t start until the
Reformation seems implicit in Driscoll’s definition but surely most historians
would propose Christendom got a boost from Constantine and that the Carolingian
empire had some small role to play across a thousand years of European history.
Driscoll has returned to an idea he credited
to his daughter Ashley back in Win Your War, that Christians should think in
terms of black and white (binary thinking).
From page 3 of Christian Theology vs Critical Theory:
Everything God creates,
Satan counterfeits. The counterfeit of Christian Theology is Critical Theory. As a spiritual virus that spreads
much more quickly than a physical virus, it has already infected and affected
academia, government, and social media platforms, as well as many pulpits and
pastors. In Romans 1, Paul speaks of Critical Theory as part of the “lie” that
is against the “truth” and he says that the demonic powers at work in the world
“suppress the truth” to silence dissent with things like social media
throttling, banning from platforms, and cancel culture. This is not solely a
political issue. This is primarily a spiritual and a theological issue that has
already taken deep-seated root in many mainline, apostate, liberal Christian
denominations that fly the rainbow flag and join in parades for things they
should be having funerals for. It has now infected many evangelicals as well.
…
Christians should think in terms of black and white (binary
thinking). Non-Christians think in
terms of shades of gray. Biblical thinking is binary thinking.
Biblical Christianity
requires black-and-white thinking because it is dualistic. From beginning to end, the Bible is
thoroughly categorical: Satan and God, demons and angels, sin and holiness,
lies and truth, wolves and shepherds, non-Christians and Christians, damnation
and salvation, Hell and Heaven. An exhaustive list could fill a book—but you
get the point. The Bible makes clear distinctions and judgments between opposed
categories.
What kind of dualistic
thinking? Like a Donatist, Gnostic or Marcionite
dualism? Those were declared heresies
ages ago. Jeffrey Burton Russell wrote
in his book Satan: The Early Christian
Traditions that Christianity was not a monist religion in its orthodox
forms but neither was it dualistic in the sense that Mazdaism was; it was, instead,
a modified or mitigated dualism.
Anthropological dualism he argued, was mainly a Greek concept and that
early Christian heresies tended toward dualisms. That there are dualistic
elements in Christian thought and traditions is easy to establish but the
question as to how and why Mark Driscoll would or should be considered
competent to make such a sweeping claim about what kind of dualism is “Christian”
does not require us to answer with a clear affirmative.
Meanwhile, at
least one footnote for the founding of the Frankfurt School would seem to be in
order, especially since Driscoll showed off the books he had been reading about
critical theory on social media.