Pastor Tom Askell is a part of the Southern Baptist Convention, as am I, and he was at the gathering of SBC a couple weeks ago where they voted on a variety of resolutions to clarify where the denomination stands on various issues. One of those resolutions had to do with critical race theory and intersectionality, and so I wanted to get insight and clarity from him on that process and how the resolution ended up the way it did.
00:01:26.220Amen. Amen. Okay, the reason why I wanted to talk with you today is because I wanted to get some
00:01:32.380insight on the SBC and the things that are happening. Southern Baptist Convention, for those
00:01:37.680who are listening who may not know, I am a member of the Southern Baptist Convention, have been my whole
00:01:41.940life. You obviously are as well. And there has been a lot of, for those of us who weren't actually
00:01:48.100at the conference, who weren't actually at the convention, there were a lot of murmurs on Twitter,
00:01:54.400I would say, of, okay, there are two different conferences going on. What's the deal? We're
00:01:59.040talking about egalitarianism versus complementarianism. But really, what kind of rose to the top,
00:02:04.640it seemed like, as the most, I don't want to call it a controversy, but the biggest point
00:02:08.960of confusion maybe from the convention was this Resolution 9 on critical race theory. So I wanted
00:02:16.700to get your insight on what critical race theory is, why there was a resolution on it, and how
00:02:21.780the process kind of ended up unfolding, if you could.
00:02:25.620Critical race theory comes out of critical legal theory, which was developed in the early 70s,
00:02:32.360maybe late 60s, as a way to look at how the law functions relative to different groups of people.
00:02:41.560And so critical race theory is the idea that the way to understand racial relationships is best
00:02:50.560conceived by power structures. So you understand the world to be comprised of power structures. And here
00:02:57.000in the West, here in America, those power structures have white European males at the top, and people
00:03:02.820of color tend to be toward the bottom of strata. So racism then becomes defined by CRT as that which
00:03:10.640is systemic and structural. It's built in. So an individual white European male or any person could
00:03:17.080not have any racial animosity in their heart at all, but still be complicit in racism simply because
00:03:23.380they're part of this hegemonic or this leadership structure of racial inequity. And based on that,
00:03:31.680then, there are all kinds of proposals as to what needs to be done in order for justice to be served
00:03:36.780to those that are being oppressed. So critical race theory has proposed a lot of ideas about what
00:03:44.860should be done to relieve the oppression, for the oppressors to sit back and give up and move over.
00:03:51.800So it's a way of viewing the world that analyzes racial relationships based largely on structures
00:03:59.800and groups rather than individual people. Which is why it's not primarily concerned with equality
00:04:07.440of opportunity, but rather equality of outcome. That's kind of what it's focusing on. Okay.
00:04:13.120They think that if we can come up with some calculation that would take the oppressors who you said are
00:04:18.320typically white European males, take the oppressors, lower them down, take the oppressed, which is
00:04:24.940typically in their eyes, people of color, lift them up, then maybe at the end of the day, we can have
00:04:31.000this kind of equitable utopia that we believe will finally be the heaven on earth that we have been
00:04:39.220striving toward. Is that kind of their goal? Or would you say it's more supremacy of those who have been
00:04:45.740oppressed to the degradation of those who have traditionally been the oppressor?
00:04:51.420Well, it depends largely on who you listen to, because both of those views have been proposed by
00:04:56.580people from within this framework. There are those who say that this is only an analytical tool. This
00:05:02.420is a way of viewing the world. But of course, you read the critical race theorists themselves,
00:05:06.360like Richard Delgado and Gene Stefanski, and they say, no, this is a theory that is advocacy.
00:05:12.320This is designed to change things, to change structures. So you've got typical social theories
00:05:20.100that just examine what is. They try to understand the way things really are and describe them. Well,
00:05:26.700this theory says we look at what the way things are, we tell you the way they are, so that they can
00:05:31.960be changed to become what we think they must be or they ought to be, which in reality, it's a godlike
00:05:38.460perspective. Yeah, you know, we're going to make things the way that we determined to be right.
00:05:43.340And they want to really, they see, which this is typical of, you know, social justice advocates and
00:05:49.280people on the left, they see any kind of discrepancy or any kind of difference between whether it's
00:05:54.500between the sexes, whether it's between the races, as inherent injustice. So if there is a difference in
00:06:01.520outcome or a difference in destination, it's not because of different choices per se, but it's
00:06:07.240always, they usually propose because of some kind of injustice, which I suppose is how critical race
00:06:15.940theory somehow infiltrated, not just the church, but the Southern Baptist convention. You have people
00:06:21.920who are concerned with inequity, concerned with injustice. They see something like critical race
00:06:26.960theory. And they say, well, that, that sounds good. Is that kind of what happened or how did this
00:06:32.160all come together? Yeah, I think that has been going on in different places. I've had conversations
00:06:38.560with some professors and some of our seminaries about critical race theory over the last several
00:06:43.960months. A couple of conversations with people I disagree with who see this as a good thing. And I
00:06:50.140don't see it as a good thing. I see it as filled with problems, but the way that this got to the floor
00:06:56.140of the Southern Baptist convention and in God's providence, it was the last session of the
00:07:01.180convention. And it was the last 15 minutes of the last session of the convention. So everybody's
00:07:05.820tired. Most people are gone. Folks want to, to be done and go to dinner. And this is one of 13
00:07:13.340resolutions that the resolutions committee of the SBC determined to bring out for the convention to
00:07:20.260vote on. They're recommending these resolutions. What I discovered later, I didn't know,
00:07:26.120know it at the time. But what I discovered later is that an original resolution under the name of
00:07:32.540critical race theory and intersectionality had been proposed by a pastor from California.
00:07:39.000And you have to, any Southern Baptist can submit a resolution if it's in keeping with the standings
00:07:44.640of their church and they have credentials to come to the convention. That has to be done 15 days before
00:07:49.300the convention. So the committee meets, they spend hours looking at all these recommendations that have come
00:07:53.800in and determine which ones to bring out. They have the option of completely declining a resolution
00:07:59.120and not bringing it out. They have the option of editing a resolution any way that they see fit
00:08:04.400and then bringing it out. They have the option of also writing their own resolutions.
00:08:09.520Well, we were told by the chairman of the committee, I think he said there were 18 resolutions submitted,
00:08:14.520and that they had rejected nine of them. Maybe I forget the exact numbers, but it meant that they wrote
00:08:22.980like six of their own. So I think they had seven that were, had come that they were going to pass along
00:08:29.360and six they wrote of their own. Well, it dawned on me later that this is a resolution that they said
00:08:34.860came from this pastor in California. So I actually tracked him down the next day, called him, talked to
00:08:40.300him and got a copy of his original resolution. And it's completely opposite of what was proposed by
00:08:46.680the committee. The committee completely rewrote his resolution, kept his name, and at least suggested,
00:08:53.440if not giving the implication, that this was something that they had just passed along from a messenger.
00:09:01.620Well, that wasn't the case. What happened is the committee on resolutions went through the first
00:09:10.920eight of these resolutions. They had like 20 minutes to discuss them all. There were a lot of debates
00:09:15.880about that. So we get to resolution nine and they said, we're just going to bundle that with the last
00:09:20.920four resolutions. We're going to vote on nine through 13 altogether. The messengers protested that
00:09:27.300and they decided that they had to take them one by one. Well, I had received a text from Al Mohler
00:09:32.780at Southern Seminary earlier that day saying, are you going to offer an amendment on resolution number
00:09:37.080nine? And I had not read it at that time. I read it, gathered some brothers together.
00:09:40.880So when you're talking about, when you're talking about the resolution nine that Al Mohler is referencing
00:09:46.680to and the one that you hadn't read yet, are you talking about the resolution nine in its original form
00:09:52.540from the pastor in California? Are you talking about the new version that ended up
00:09:56.460being the resolution? Yeah, the new version. This is the one that got printed in the daily bulletin.
00:10:00.860I didn't know there was an original version. Okay. So the change occurred, the change occurred
00:10:06.120from the pastor in California through the messenger to this resolution being voted on. So it didn't get
00:10:13.120changed in committee between you guys. It got changed from the suggested form to what you guys
00:10:20.120actually saw and voted on. That's correct. And that happened by the committee, the resolutions committee.
00:10:26.460So they took it and changed it. They kept the same name, which was a little confusing because it gave the
00:10:32.340impression that it was this pastor from California's resolution.
00:10:36.120And it was totally different. Yeah, completely different. So when we looked at it and read the resolution, it became apparent pretty quickly.
00:10:45.780To amend it sufficiently so that it would be a good resolution would take a lot of work. So we finished, I had like 17 specific amendments to take this phrase out, add this phrase, delete this, add this.
00:10:58.780So there's no way on the floor of a convention, you're going to get people to follow along with that kind of intricate change. It's just not going to happen. So in consultation with Al and some others, we decided, hey, let's just reduce it. We'll add, we'll make three recommendations to amend it. One, add a whereas and other, two other resolved sections of the resolution. So the whereas address the origin of critical race theory.
00:11:27.660Hang on. There's a lot of people that probably don't, haven't read the resolution. Tell us just in general terms, what the resolution was that you guys were deciding on and amend it. What did it say about critical race theory?
00:11:40.020Yeah, it says a lot of good things. I mean, in fact, if you take it with a line, I probably wouldn't say that it says any one thing that's wrong. But it's, it's one of those situations where you can say true things that mislead. Like, you know, Ali has not been in prison in six months.
00:11:55.220Well, that's a true thing, but that's very misleading. And so the, the statement affirms the sufficiency of scripture, the authority of scripture, everything needs to be tested by scripture. It does all that right and good.
00:12:06.660But it says that critical race theory and intersectionality are analytical tools that can be misappropriated in bad ways that commend worldly ideologies. And that must be rejected.
00:12:18.800Well, is that true? That is true. That's not the old truth because they come from godless worldviews. They come from Marxism. And that source needs to be understood if you're going to try to use it merely equal tool.
00:12:34.180So whenever I made the recommendation for the amendments to clarify that, to reiterate that our identity as Christians is in Christ and that we must reject all kinds of identity politics, the, and I, I offered it as a friendly resolution.
00:12:49.700I actually wrote it up, typed it up, emailed it into the committee long before I got to a microphone. So they had it on the platform to consider it, know what I was going to say. It was no animosity at all on my part.
00:12:59.920And I thought, I can keep this from being a train rep because there's no way the convention is going to vote on this unanimously or with an overwhelming majority as is.
00:13:09.320Well, when I did that, Dr. Woods, Curtis Woods, who's a professor at Southern Seminary, who's the chairman of the committee, said, I said, I offer this as a friendly recommendation, amendment.
00:13:18.580He said, we take it as an unfriendly amendment. And he went on to say that the aspiration of the committee in offering the resolution as it was printed
00:13:28.100was to demonstrate, to show that critical race theory and intersectionality are simply analytical tools.
00:13:47.700Yeah, yeah, that's right. So that was the long and short of it.
00:13:53.060We ran out of time. They called for the vote on my amendment. The amendment failed. It was a split vote.
00:13:59.420I don't know how close, but it wasn't unanimous or even close.
00:14:02.600You know, it was probably the 60-40 or something. And then the resolution passed overwhelmingly after that.
00:14:08.100So, and this is not to call anyone specific out, but I guess I'm just wondering why anyone in the SBC who does believe in the supremacy of scripture,
00:14:20.340I'm not questioning that, who does believe that we should be viewing everything through a biblical worldview,
00:14:27.020why would they view your amendment, which basically says, you know, identity politics and these analytical tools are, you know,
00:14:35.620they're not neutral or they're not kind of a perspective that Christians who do hold to the supremacy of scripture should be having.
00:14:43.980Why would anyone disagree with that? Did they articulate why?
00:14:47.860Not at the, uh, not at the convention, no. Uh, I've had conversations privately with some who are advocates of Kroker race theory,
00:14:58.240one in particular, and he is convinced that these are useful tools, that this is the way the world thinks
00:15:04.340and that we can learn from the world in this way how racism is structural and systemic in our society so that we can better address it.
00:15:12.440Well, of course, you have to buy the presupposition if you're going to buy the solution.
00:15:17.800And the solution is contrary to scripture quite simply because the presuppositions are contrary to scripture.
00:15:25.160If scripture is sufficient, then we ought to be able to depend upon scripture to help us analyze what is partiality,
00:15:32.000what is sinful ways of thinking and treating, thinking about and treating people.
00:15:36.200Right. I wonder if, I don't know, maybe it's something in human nature,
00:15:41.380but it does seem to be popularized over the past 10 or so years to kind of draw these lines of distinction
00:15:47.680that it almost seems like there are some people within evangelical Christianity right now
00:15:52.340who are simply not content with saying, okay, there are those who are dead in sin apart from Christ.
00:15:58.440And there are those who are alive in Christ.
00:16:00.520And those who are alive in Christ are reconciled not only to the God of the universe through Jesus,
00:16:04.800but we're also reconciled to one another despite our, despite our differences within the body of Christ.
00:16:09.860Those who are not with Christ don't have that.
00:16:12.280So to me, the gospel is the only analytical tool that you need for reconciliation.
00:16:17.700But it seems like people aren't quite content with that distinction.
00:16:20.920It's like we need to draw other distinctions within the body of Christ.
00:16:23.920So we need to draw racial distinctions.
00:16:25.780We need to draw the socioeconomic distinctions,
00:16:27.740not to say that those don't actually exist when we're a part of the world, because they do.