Is it really that hard to just let Black people talk about the injustice they face every damn day & hear what change they think needs to happen? (Spoiler: it’s going to be easier for you to focus on my potty mouth word & my being a woman than it is to be honest.) https://twitter.com/dennyburk/status/1358183864821309456

1. “Intersectionality teaches rightly that it is possible for people to be discriminated against on the basis of more than one personal characteristic. That is an absolutely true ‘insight’, but I don’t need CRT to arrive at that insight. All I need is a biblical doctrine of sin.”

2. “A biblical doctrine of sin” isn’t a universally agreed upon standard in Christianity-hence denominations. Beyond that, my faith-based doctrine of sin may be enough to point me to an understanding of intersectionality, but it doesn’t give me practical tools to address it.

3. Any faith-based insight I may have about how people could be oppressed in multiple ways depending on different life factors does me no good in (for example) an IEP mtg where I have to discuss w/ teachers how an adoptee’s history of trauma & institutionalization impact learning

4. It’s not b/c we’ve “taken the Bible out of schools”. It’s b/c there are proven consequences to childhood institutionalization, transracial adoption, & trauma/abuse/neglect. If I describe that as an intersection of needs backed by data, an IEP team can consider those needs.

5. When I am not afraid that God’s sovereignty will be threatened if I use the word “intersectionality” as a lens for a team of teachers to meet a child’s basic daily needs at school, I can make tangible changes for the good of that child, which will follow them into adulthood.

6. James might compare it to telling someone to go & be warm & well-fed without seeing to their physical needs. Because faith unaccompanied by actions isn’t alive.

7. So if I hold to my biblical doctrine w/out employing a more widely understood vernacular, b/c I decide intersectionality is best served by a doctrinal lens unrecognizable outside the church, even to some fellow believers in professional settings, I keep the salt in the shaker.

8. Moreover, if I charge that word “intersectionality” w/ fear & shame by deeming it extra-biblical or implying someone’s faith is too small if their doctrine doesn’t *get* intersectionality w/out saying the taboo, I’ve loaded them w/ a burden I have no business putting on them.

9. But to the point of CRT. Sure, if everyone’s cool enough w/ their Bible they’ll arrive at the “meat” of CRT w/out ever using CRT itself. The thing is, CRT grew out of Critical Legal Theory, which holds hat laws exist to keep the status quo. Jesus knew something about that.

10. When Jesus is asked inside the Roman Empire by followers of Mosaic law to come up w/ the most important commandment, he busts out 2. No pigeonholing him. Love God. And-this one turns Mosaic law on its ear-love your neighbor as yourself.

11. So what part of hedging a systemic theory of oppression into a corner we sometimes pretend is reserved for “secular” concerns (h/t @DavidDark) prepares me to love my neighbor? Why can’t I just be free enough to consider CRT & hear what my Black & Brown neighbors have to say?

12. If Jesus frees us, we’re free indeed. So am I free enough to receive the witness of my fellow Image-bearers, to humble ourselves & hear them out, & then to work toward the systemic earthly changes necessary to gain greater equity for <checks notes> God’s own Image in others?

13. If I’m *not* free enough to do that, then what exactly do I think I’m defending? It’s not the kingdom-that’s already at hand. What empire needs upholding that even affirming the shadow of justice w/in CRT would break? Am I to be in the business of upholding empires?

14. Honestly. At day’s end, I don’t see a difference btwn teaching that rejects utilizing theories of social/legal structure & justice b/c “the Bible has everything we need already” & teaching that rejects chemo for prayer alone. Don’t hold people back from love.