Critical Race Theory: A Theological and Political Critique by Dr. Sam Smith – Summary and Analysis

Critical Race Theory: A Theological and Political Critique by Dr. Sam Smith – Summary and Analysis

Summary

In his white paper titled Theology of Politics: Critical Race Theory, Dr. Sam Smith of Liberty University's Standing for Freedom Center critically examines Critical Race Theory (CRT) through a conservative Christian theological lens. Smith (n.d.) argues that CRT is a secular ideology rooted in neo-Marxist thought that lacks the redemptive qualities inherent in a Christian worldview. He contends that CRT views racism as America’s “original sin” but offers no pathway to grace, forgiveness, or reconciliation. Instead, it perpetuates what he calls a "repetitive dialectic of destructive critique," akin to the myth of Sisyphus—an endless effort to achieve justice that never arrives (Smith, n.d.).

Smith emphasizes that CRT promotes perpetual lamentation and demands public repentance from those deemed privileged but denies the possibility of individual transformation or societal redemption. In this framework, power dynamics are central: individuals are judged by their group identity (oppressor or oppressed), not by their character or personal conduct. As such, CRT is portrayed as incompatible with both biblical teachings and American ideals of individual responsibility and equality under the law (Smith, n.d.).

Political Science Analysis

From a political science perspective, Smith's critique is emblematic of a broader conservative movement opposing CRT’s influence in education, law, and public policy. This opposition often stems from the belief that CRT challenges foundational liberal-democratic principles such as individualism, colorblind justice, and merit-based opportunity (Bissell, 2023). Smith’s theological framing reinforces this stance by suggesting that CRT represents not just a political misstep but a spiritual crisis for the church and the nation.

Conversely, proponents of CRT, such as Kimberlé Crenshaw, argue that CRT offers essential tools to interrogate how systemic racism operates within legal and institutional frameworks. Crenshaw (2011) asserts that CRT helps expose the ways in which race and power are intertwined, thereby enabling more equitable public policy and legal reform. From this standpoint, CRT is not inherently un-American or anti-Christian, but rather a critical lens for uncovering and addressing longstanding injustices.

The ideological divergence is also playing out in policymaking. Numerous states have introduced or passed legislation banning CRT-related instruction in schools, reflecting concerns similar to those expressed by Smith—that CRT erodes national unity and moral clarity (Bissell, 2023).

Opposing Theological Interpretation: Black Theology

While Smith’s critique reflects a conservative evangelical outlook, an opposing theological tradition—Black theology—offers a contrasting view. Black theology, pioneered by theologians such as James H. Cone, understands the Christian gospel as inherently concerned with liberation from oppression. Cone (1969) argues that “God is Black” in the sense that God identifies with the suffering of the oppressed, particularly African Americans in the context of systemic racism and white supremacy.

Black theology does not reject the biblical doctrine of sin, but it reinterprets sin to include not only personal moral failings but also institutionalized injustice. This aligns with the goals of CRT in highlighting structural racism. Moreover, Black theology contends that Christian redemption must include social justice and systemic transformation, not merely personal salvation (Cone, 1970).

In this framework, CRT is not antagonistic to Christianity but complementary: it serves as a tool to expose the mechanisms of injustice that the gospel calls believers to challenge. The emphasis is on collective responsibility, prophetic witness, and solidarity with the marginalized—principles deeply rooted in biblical narratives of liberation (e.g., the Exodus, the prophets, and the ministry of Jesus).

Conclusion

Dr. Sam Smith’s critique of CRT offers a theologically grounded argument that it is incompatible with both Christian doctrine and the American constitutional tradition. While this view resonates with conservative audiences and has influenced political discourse and policy efforts, it contrasts sharply with theological traditions like Black theology, which see the fight against systemic racism as central to the Christian mission. This divergence reflects a broader debate within American Christianity and political culture over the intersection of race, justice, and faith in public life.

---

References

Bissell, S. (2023). Critical race theory bans and the First Amendment: A legal analysis. Stanford Law Review, 75(1), 205–235. https://review.law.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2023/01/Bissell-75-Stan.-L.-Rev.-205.pdf

Cone, J. H. (1969). Black theology and black power. New York, NY: Seabury Press.

Cone, J. H. (1970). A Black theology of liberation. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott.

Crenshaw, K. (2011). Twenty years of critical race theory: Looking back to move forward. Impact Cubed. https://impactcubed.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/TwentyYearsofCriticalRaceTheoryLookingbacktoMoveForwardKCrenshaw2011.pdf

Smith, S. (n.d.). Theology of politics: Critical race theory. Standing for Freedom Center. https://www.standingforfreedom.com/white-paper/theology-of-politics-critical-race-theory/