In a recent contributions at LRC, I have alluded to the ontological roots of the contemporary Left with the ancient heresy of Gnosticism. Ethnic Gnosticism is a term crafted by Dr. Voddie Baucham to explain the phenomenon of people believing that somehow because of ones ethnicity that one is able to know when something or someone is racist. In this powerful and insightful sermon, Dr. Baucham, Dean of Theology at African Christian University and former pastor from California, sheds light on the way this insidious ideology is undermining the gospel and compromising genuine Christian relationships in the church today.
In recent years we have a growing concern about “social justice.” What is meant by that phrase, however, varies widely among those who use and promote it. Dr. Bauchman believes today’s social justice, anti-racism movements are “poisonous” ideology steeped in cultural Marxist critical theory, which aim to “redistribute” justice to certain societal groups with no consideration for the individual. What is too often missing—even in the calls for “social justice” coming from Christian leaders—is a clear understanding of biblical justice. Justice exists because God is just and righteous. He is the One who defines justice and He has revealed what true justice is in the Bible.
The great Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises, mentor of Congressman Ron Paul and economist/historian Murray Rothbard, discussed this Marxist nonsense in his magnum opus, Human Action, under the category of polylogism.
This is the bogus idea that the logical structure of the mind is different based on one’s class, race, ethnicity, national origin, gender, sexual preference, etc.
This skewed Marxist concept lies at the root of all “politically correct” notions of cultural relativism, intersectionality, and multiculturalism fashionable in academia, the elite media, and critical theory circles today.
Author Elizabeth C. Corey notes:
In 1968, the political philosopher Eric Voegelin published a little book called Science, Politics and Gnosticism. In a section of that book entitled “Ersatz Religion,” he argued that modern ideologies are very much like ancient Gnostic movements. Certain fundamental assumptions, Voegelin wrote, characterize both ancient and modern Gnosticism.
The gnostic, Voegelin observed, is fundamentally dissatisfied with his situation and believes that the world is “intrinsically poorly organized” and that salvation from the world’s evils is possible. The gnostic further thinks that “the order of being will have to be changed in an historical process” and that this is possible through human effort. Finally, the gnostic looks for a prophet who shares saving knowledge about how to make the transformation happen. It turns out that the intersectional project accords in every detail with Voegelin’s description.
Intersectional scholars are, by definition, unhappy with their situations in life. From an outsider’s perspective, this seems more reasonable for some than for others, though it’s apparent that everyone feels it to a greater or lesser extent. Most affectingly, at the Notre Dame conference, several black feminist scholars from South Africa described the explicitly repressive measures they had endured at their universities, where the prejudice against them is overt and sometimes results in violence. As one scholar put it, “It’s not like I’m full of despair.” Then she paused and thought for a moment. “But, of course, I am full of despair.”
This is more than the widely-accepted idea that our various life experiences shape our world view, or influence our value judgments in making ethical and moral decisions. Again, polylogism specifically holds that the logical structure of the mind is different based on one’s class, race, nationality, gender, sexual preference, etc. There is no objective reality independent from these fixed determinative factors of causality. Another way to look at it, it’s the old Marxist concept of “the sociology of knowledge” applied to law and public policy.
9:56 am on August 30, 2020
