Campolo, Homosexuality, and the Gospel

Campolo and my Early Twenties

Tony Campolo has been very influential for me during my early twenties. I have seen him preach on various occasions at various locations, met him at least twice, got him to autograph one of my books he wrote and enjoyed a pastor’s lunch-in with him on one particular occasion.

His thoughts on how Christians should view homosexuality have also been very formative for me (see: Speaking My Mind by Campolo). During my teens and early twenties all homosexuals were in sin – in my mind; they all ‘chose’ to be homosexual (God would never ‘create’ a homosexual was the argument), and my tolerance for them was somewhere around zero. Then a friend told me once that he had a friend who was gay and a Christian. I argued with him that this is possible, the two are antithetical; none-the-less he told me that his gay/Christian friend denied himself and chose to live a celibate life knowing that practicing homosexuality was an abomination to God. This insight blew my mind!

Campolo clarified this point for me in his book, Speaking My Mind, when he said that while the scriptures condemn a homosexual lifestyle, they say nothing of homosexual orientation; and that scientist still as yet do not know what ‘causes’ homosexual orientation. We Christians should show the love of Christ towards those of a homosexual orientation rather then condemn them all to hell and run in the opposite direction.

Campolo and me today

Tony Campolo recently published a new book for “Red Letter Christians” as a “guide to politics” in light of the upcoming election.

While browsing through I was not surprised to find a chapter again on homosexuality; only this time he deals less with whether or not it’s biblical, but rather, should Christians stand in the way of homosexual union (a.k.a. marriage). Throughout he argues that we Christians should not impose our personal convictions of our personal faith onto anyone else, not least on practicing homosexuals. Instead we should have compassion on homosexual couples because they do not receive the same benefits which heterosexual couples receive, (if a homosexual partner dies, for example, his lover will not get anything of the will); and in this way we may show the ‘love of Christ’. The point being that Christians should not make homosexual marriage a ‘voting issue’.

All of this boils down to the fact that I have my faith, I have my beliefs, I have my convictions, I have my religion and I should in no way impose my personal religion onto someone else’s lifestyle.

I have discussed this issue before with friends; when we preach the ‘gospel’ – so our consensus went – we do so personal. We do not worry about ‘how’ they are living until ‘after’ we get them saved, and only then do we say that ‘so and so is sin, and now that you are a Christian you must abandon these things’.

Still, after reading Campolo’s thoughts I walked away struggling; there simply was something wrong with the picture he was painting for me; and consequentially, this challenged the consensus I had with my friends; namely, this idea of a ‘personal’ faith that does not impose itself upon the lifestyle of the ‘unsaved’. And this, again, boils down to something else; namely, the Gospel: what is it and how does it work. Is it a personal invitation to a personal relationship or a public ‘proclamation with expectation’? And this boils down to something else, namely, how Campolo’s Gospel (and that of Billy Graham and me and my friends and this whole generation for that matter) is Post-Enlightenment individualism and not necessarily Jesus’ Gospel preached by Paul.

So yet again, Campolo’s writings have influenced me, though not in the direction – I’m sure – which he would have hoped.

The ‘Wright’ Gospel of Paul

As I suggested in my previous blog, the Gospel of Jesus Christ is not so much (though of course it is a part of this) leading individuals to Jesus that they might become ‘saved’. The Gospel is much more then that; the Gospel of Jesus Christ is a story. It is the story of a King; one who proved himself that he is King, not so much in the death he died, but by the resurrection which ensued.

And when the early Christians – not least Paul himself – declared this Gospel, the announcement was an aggressive affront to the powers that be, namely, that Jesus is Lord, not Caesar, and not your gods and goddesses. For Caesar is mortal, placed on earth to serve the true King of kings, and your gods and goddesses are mere cheap imitations, be it man-made statues or the demons behind them.

This means that the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the announcement that he is the true King of the universe was not reserved for one on one evangelism – for this would hardly call for mass persecution – it was an affront to the secular political, religious and social structures of the day.

Tony Campolo – not to mention McLaren and perhaps many others, as recently this is becoming very popular – are drawing a distinction that separates preaching the gospel, which is an individual to individual thing to do they say, and being a social activist while avoiding imposing ‘Christian morals’ onto the lifestyles of others. I fear that Campolo, in his rightful zeal to address the issues surrounding ‘social injustice’ – something that perhaps the ‘church’ (corporately) has become lax on and for which Campolo is to be commended for – that he many be sliding down the greasy hill of losing sight of the biblical concept of the true Gospel altogether. While social justice is good, our calling is not too send people to hell with food in their stomachs, but to warn them of the hell they are in for; namely, that they are serving a false god, be it money, power, sex, or whatever else.

N.T. Wright says it best, and Campolo and others would do good to return to the scriptures – and not just the red print – and remember what the Gospel of Jesus Christ truly is; “As soon as we get this right” says Wright, “we destroy at a stroke the disastrous dichotomy that has existed in the people’s minds between ‘preaching the gospel’ on the one hand and what used to be called loosely ‘social action’ or ‘social injustice’ on the other. Preaching the gospel means announcing Jesus as Lord of the world; and, unless we are prepared to contradict ourselves with every breath we take, we cannot make that announcement without seeking to bring that lordship to bear over every aspect of the world.” [What Saint Paul Really Said, p.154]

If Jesus truly is Lord of the world, and if we as Christians are called to announce (i.e. preach) this Gospel, then what are we to say of homosexual union? That it is none of our business? That if we meet one on one I won’t speak ‘negatively’ about your lifestyle, I just want to tell you about Jesus’ love. Is that what we are supposed to do? Or should we stand true to our calling and the scriptures by declaring that your god of sex, your modern day Aphrodite is a cheap imitation of the One who is God, namely Jesus, the Spirit and the Father! And that you must cease and desist serving your false god and giving in to the flesh of your demons, the desires of this world; to serve the true King who came to set this world straight.

‘Jesus is Lord’, that is the Gospel; a declaration with expectation; this is what the early Christians announced; this is why they were persecuted.

Tony Campolo has much to offer, and I still enjoy gleaning from his stories and experiences (I just purchased a goody - Let Me Tell You A Story). This blog is not really or primarily about homosexual unions, it's about reforming and continuing to reform in my own personal thoughts (pensees) and of course, "blogging out loud". The heart of this blog is about reforming my thoughts on "the Gospel" - this is post-conservativism in progress.

Derek

[P.S. my heart breaks over Ray Boltz decision to give in to his demons after battling those desires for so long. I hear his songs today and feel sorrow for him; in Set Sail he sings “there’s not a chance you can fail”, or “I pledge allegiance to the Lamb, with all my strength, with all I am”, and my heart weeps. He says that today he feels closer to God then ever since he has come out of the closet. I believe him. I’m just not sure it’s the same God. It’s easy to be close to a god who endorses your every decision; it is not so easy to be close to a God who sacrificed Himself by means of a brutal crucifixion so that you may find life more abundantly; a life that calls you to ‘deny yourself, take up your cross’ and follow Him. Ray Boltz said in an interview, I do not want to ‘deny’ who I really am any longer. This is another way of saying, Jesus is not for me, he calls me to ‘deny’ myself, and I frankly don’t want to do that any longer; so I’ll serve my desires (Aphrodite? Golden Calf?), and call it “Jesus” or “Yahweh”. What a shame]