Evangelical leader Tony Campolo addressed an audience in Oakville, Ontario, on Saturday, telling them that the “absent father” theory of homosexuality was “the dumbest thing I ever heard.” Citing statistics on single-parent families, he added that, if the theory were true, “Camden, New Jersey, would be the gay capital of the world.”
Campolo, a sociologist and Baptist pastor known for his liberal views, despite holding a conservative view of Scripture, was guest speaker at Relevant Engagement, the 2010 fundraiser for New Direction, a Canadian Christian ministry that reaches out to those “outside the heterosexual mainstream.” He said that while genetic and inborn theories of causation had not been proven, homosexuality was not a choice.
Campolo damned ex-gay reparative therapy with faint praise, saying that change of orientation was “not impossible, but rare,” later saying it was “very, very, very, very rare.” He acknowledged that many (most?) gays who try to change find out five or six years down the line that they were “kidding themselves because of social pressure from family and friends.”
He denounced the common anti-gay myth that homosexuality destroys families. “It’s the heterosexuals who are getting divorces,” he proclaimed.
Gays want to get married. If you can’t see the humor in that, you have no sense of humor whatsoever. … Here we [heterosexuals] are destroying the family, and who do we want to blame? The ones who want to get married.
He had some blunt words for Christians:
You know why gays think Christians despise them? Because Christians despise them.
He took Christians to task for their self-righteousness:
“Hate the sin, but love the sinner.” How arrogant a statement is that?
In relation to recent media reports of gay teen suicides, Campolo related his own story of a school friend who was bullied for being gay. After being rounded up by his homophobic abusers and urinated on in a changing room, he went home and hanged himself. “I knew I wasn’t a Christian,” Campolo confessed. “If I was a Christian, I would have defended Roger.”
It is well-known that while Campolo takes an essentially conservative view of same-sex relationships, his wife, Peggy, takes a more liberal view. He discussed the tensions and admitted his high view of the Bible’s authority meant he could not fully affirm homosexual erotic relationships. He acknowledged that “a good biblical case” could be made both for and against homosexuality, and declared “I could be wrong” as the most important admission both sides could make. He said homosexuality was not a defining Christian issue:
I’m not sure it’s a defining issue in the Bible. … Not enough for Jesus to have made it a defining issue.
He also addressed the controversy over same-sex marriage, condemning politicians–he named Karl Rove among them–who manipulated Christians into making homosexuality an issue. His solution was that “government ought to get out of the marriage business altogether.” He suggested the United States adopt an equal system similar to that in the Netherlands, say, where any couple, gay or straight, can register a civil partnership. If they want to make it marriage, they solemnize it in a church. Campolo implied he would be happy for individual churches to decide for themselves whether to perform gay marriages.
Campolo firmly nailed his colors to the conservative mast when it came to interpretation of Scripture on homosexuality. I asked him (via a live internet feed) to what extent and in what way a Christian with a traditional view of homosexuality could affirm loving, committed gay relationships, and was disappointed with his very negative answer–but also puzzled, because I have heard him express far more open views elsewhere. In his book 20 Hot Potatoes That Christians Are Afraid to Touch, he clearly affirms celibate “covenants” between same-sex couples, and I expected him to echo this in his answer. Instead, he (very apologetically) reiterated that he could not affirm gay sexual relationships.
How about this as a modest proposal for traditionally minded Christians: Affirm that love and commitment exists in gay relationships, and celebrate the fact that two people have found real love and companionship in each other. Acknowledge, if that’s your belief, that the relationship is not ideal or that it falls short, but then so does every human relationship, gay or straight–acknowledge that, too.
On several occasions I cringed as Campolo’s conservative theology showed through.
And yet, his liberal spirit showed through, too. He very desperately wants to be fully affirming, and it is clear he is committed to equality and inclusion. He is committed to finding a way to live alongside those who think and behave differently from him. It’s here that the rubber hits the road in creating a “generous space.” If a generous space is going to exist, we have to acknowledge that there will be pain along the way. We’ll offend each other. What will unite us is not that there are no differences, but that we are determined to overcome the differences, letting mercy triumph over judgment, making love a priority.
Recent Comments