Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Progressive Christian
Tony Campolo offers an Official Statement on his stance on the issue of homosexuality

Tony Campolo offers an Official Statement on his stance on the issue of homosexuality

Last updated on: June 10, 2015 at 11:36 am by Fred Clark

Tony Campolo offers an Official Statement on his stance on the issue of homosexuality 2015-06-10T11:36:54-04:00 Fred Clark

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Popular author and evangelist Tony Campolo (finally) released a formal statement yesterday “urging the church to be more welcoming” of LGBT Christians and their relationships.

This isn’t surprising. He is, after all, married to Peggy Campolo, who has long been a formidable, indomitable voice within white evangelical Christianity for the full inclusion and equality of LGBT Christians in the church. Most American evangelicals have avoided losing this argument with Peggy Campolo by avoiding it and ignoring her, but that wasn’t an option for Tony.

Tony Campolo (photo via Eastern.edu)

Plus, he’s 80 years old and semi-retired. That means he’s no longer in a hostage situation when it comes to the thousands of children aided by his former ministry, EAPE. Perhaps it seems unseemly to suggest that was a factor in Tony Campolo’s prior ambiguity on the subject of LGBT people, but the stakes were real, and high, for those kids. And the implicit (sometimes explicit) threats were real, too — as the recent experience with World Vision demonstrates. That Christian development agency lost 10,000 child sponsors due to its brief, abortive wobble from the Official Required Stance, so it might be understandable if this had been a factor in Campolo’s prior reluctance to speak as forthrightly as he now has.

Campolo’s change of heart and change of mind is important. It might have been far more important had it come sooner, of course. Agreeing with his spouse back in 2005 would’ve been genuinely prophetic and bold. Agreeing with her back in 1995 might’ve been a seismic game-changer. But in 2015 it’s not quite as impressive.

Still, as Sarah Pulliam Bailey points out, Tony is a prominent figure, and it’s still rare to see white evangelical leaders from his generation getting on board with a growing share of their younger counterparts: “Campolo joins a handful of Baby Boomer evangelical leaders who have shifted into supporting same-sex marriage. Just 21 percent of evangelicals who are above the age of 50 favor gays and lesbians marrying legally, compared to 37 percent of evangelicals between 18 and 49.”

(Before diminishing Campolo’s statement as too-late on board the bandwagon, consider even that 37 percent figure for younger evangelicals. That’s roughly the same share of white evangelicals who are willing to admit to pollsters — in secret — that they favor legal abortion.)

The substance of Tony’s announcement is also a bit more tepid and apologetic than it ought to be. He takes an oddly misdirected pastoral tone that seems to focus more on his pastoral concern for anti-gay evangelicals than for the LGBT Christians they’ve been excluding, dehumanizing and declaring unclean. That gives it a cautious, defensive air that seems more concerned with not afflicting the comfortable than with comforting the afflicted. He urges his fellow evangelicals not to exclude LGBT Christians, but at the same time he pleads with them not to exclude him for saying so.

Kimberly Knight, Brandan Robertson and Eliel Cruz all express appreciation for Campolo’s statement as well as optimism about the potential impact he may have as a prominent and popular leader. But they all also express some thoughtful, solid critique, and those are all worth your time to click over and read:

• Kimberly Knight, “Regarding Evangelical Tony Campolo’s ‘acceptance’ of gay, Christian couples”

• Brandan Robertson, “Tony Campolo Calls for Full Inclusion of Gay & Lesbian Christians”

• Eliel Cruz, “Tony Campolo announces support for inclusion of ‘gay Christian couples'”

Let me just quote a bit from Kimberly Knight’s response:

I am holding in delicate tension my genuine gratitude for folks who do and are changing their hearts and minds every day, exasperation (and a little suspicion) with late starts, and faithful clarity that anything less than full inclusion in church and society is a denial of the sacred worth and very humanity of LGBT people. Of me.

Her frustration recalls what Dr. King called “the fierce urgency of now” — an urgency and ferocity that Campolo’s Official Statement fails to convey.

That’s a function, in part, of genre. This is an Official Statement announcing his change of “stance” on an “issue.” Such Official Statements are a kind of ritual genre in the white evangelical tribe, and that genre both limits what can be said and shapes how it can be said. They cannot be about justice or injustice directly, but only about one’s “stance” toward them. And they aren’t constructed to accommodate or acknowledge actual people, only the “issues” that affect them.

This displaces the conversation — removing it several steps from the fierce urgency of now and pushing it off toward some more abstract and ethereal discussion of the relative validity of various possible “stances” and their status within the tribe.

That doesn’t mean that such formal, rigidly constructed and conscribed Official Statements cannot still do some good. As Knight says, “Each and every voice in the evangelical world that speaks of out loud about loving gay people is good. Those words might fall upon the ears of just one other pastor who will for maybe the first time consider thinking differently.”

And they can give occasion, and give courage, to others who may also choose to speak up and speak out. Tony’s statement has already done so — inspiring former long-time Christianity Today editor David Neff to offer an Official Statement of his own, praising and agreeing with Campolo and writing that “I think the ethically responsible thing for gay and lesbian Christians to do is to form lasting, covenanted partnerships. I also believe that the church should help them in those partnerships in the same way the church should fortify traditional marriages.”

Neff is, like Tony, retired. CT’s current editor, Mark Galli, is not. Galli thus responds to Neff’s Official Statement with an Official Statement of his own.*

Galli’s Christianity Today editorial, posted yesterday, could be summarized by the opening lines of an essay also posted yesterday by an evangelical scholar at a leading evangelical seminary:

Certain kinds of people simply cannot be part of the people of God.

Making such a judgment is not based on bigotry. It is simply based on the story of God in which the people of God are defined in particular ways. These definitions demand that some are out while others are in.

Those definitions are definite, Christianity Today says. They are given to us by the inerrant, authoritative, unchanging Word of God. And to question those definitions is to question the authority of the Bible itself.

All true, says that evangelical professor. But we need to see what else he says as well.

We’ll get to that next.

– – – – – – – – – – – –

* Is Mark Galli piously “saddened” by Neff and Campolo? Of course. Does this “sadness” seem like a fatuous, hollow, sanctimonious regurgitation of everything the tribal gatekeepers require in an Official Statement Reaffirming the Official Required Stance? Of course. Does he employ this pious sadness to mischaracterize the statements and arguments of those who sadden him in a blatant exercise of sheer dishonesty? Of course:

We at CT are sorry when fellow evangelicals modify their views to accord with the current secular thinking on this matter. And we’ll continue to be sorry, because over the next many years, there will be other evangelicals who similarly reverse themselves on sexual ethics.

But let’s not judge. The performance of such fatuous, forced piety is, again, partly a function of genre. And unemployment really, really does suck.

Previous Post

June 9, 2015

Revisiting the immorality of the religious right's 'moral high ground'

Next Post

June 10, 2015 J.R. Daniel Kirk on the heart of the gospel (This is not an Official Statement of a stance on an issue)

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category class warfare evangelicals Iraq Left Behind Mammon music Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Which major prophet book is directly after Isaiah?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Jeremiah Lamentations Daniel Ezekiel