Tony Campolo (Nashville: W Publishing, 2004) 240 pp. Review by Ken Deeks.
That smell in the air is the odour of burning hair as Tony Campolo’s
critics light their locks on fire. Always the black sheep of the
evangelical family, Campolo really stirs things up with his newest
release "Speaking My Mind." The book echoes his 1988 work "20 Hot
Potatoes Christians are Afraid to Touch." It also tackled tough issues
usually shunned by the religious right, but "Speaking My Mind"
confronts critical questions not asked in "Hot Potatoes."
Campolo
addresses the realty that almost every sphere of evangelicalism, from
publishing to preaching to broadcasting is a voice for social
conservatism. Campolo takes on the issues one by one. Is evangelicalism
sexist? Are evangelicals handling the gay issue all wrong? Is there a
second chance for those who die without Christ? Is Islam really an evil
religion? Are evangelicals too militaristic?
Two of his most controversial assertions concern homosexuality and
salvation. On homosexuality, Campolo restates what he said fifteen
years ago in "Hot Potatoes": There is a difference between homosexual
orientation and homosexual behaviour; Scripture and tradition prohibit
homosexual behaviour. What is new in "Speaking My Mind" is Campolo’s
treatment of same-sex unions, an issue pushed to the forefront by
recent events in the Anglican Church of Canada and the Episcopal Church
USA. While voicing his opposition to same-sex unions, Campolo
emphatically states this should not be a church-dividing matter. He
illustrates his point from his own marriage. His wife, Campolo tells
us, believes the church should legitimize homosexual unions because
lifelong commitments between people who love each other enhances their
humanity. He disagrees, but affirms, “My wife and I are evidence that
it is possible to have opposing opinions on this subject without
getting a divorce.” In other words, differences on this issue should
not be the cause of further schism in an already divided church. If you
are tempted to dismiss Campolo’s argument as greasy-grace based on
insipid sentiment, be warned. He seriously engages Scripture, science,
and psychology as he struggles to root out a position that is both
compassionate to human struggles, and faithful to scripture.
If the chapter on homosexuality causes waves, and it will, the chapter
on salvation will trigger a tsunami. Is there a second chance for those
who die without Christ? While Campolo never answers the question
directly, he leaves the reader with the impression that his sympathies
lie in that direction. He contrasts the classical evangelical position
with three alternatives, each of which a minority of evangelicals
support. He explicitly rejects universalism, but leaves open the
possibilities of annihilationism and post-mortem salvation. Those who
pick a fight with Campolo should be prepared to fight a couple of his
friends as well, like evangelical favourites John Stott, George
MacDonald and C. S. Lewis, from whom Campolo borrows liberally.
In classic Campolo fashion, the book is not an academic thesis, nor is
it intended to be a theological, philosophical, or scientific text, but
a witness of spiritual commitment, which nevertheless contains the
suggestion of a theory. Embedded in the stories, scripture exploration,
and exhortations, is a recurring appeal for evangelicals to re-examine
the roots of their thinking on controversial issues, and to gander
again at assumptions beneath the surface. The approach is a blend of
conversation and argument, of self-disclosure and analysis, of personal
witness and systematic argumentation.
Threaded throughout the book, the reader senses Campolo’s anticipation
of his critics’ accusation that he no longer fits in the evangelical
family. In response, Campolo reaffirms his evangelical credentials
several times. He believes the Bible is inerrant, he affirms that the
Apostle’s and Nicene Creeds define orthodoxy, and he confesses that
salvation is through Christ alone.
Nevertheless, he wonders aloud if many of the topics he discusses
threaten to divide the evangelical community in two. He expects they
will, and unfortunately seems prepared to speed the divorce. In fact,
Campolo advocates a new movement of progressive evangelicalism, and
provides an address to which those interested in exploring such a
movement can write. According to Campolo, progressive evangelicalism,
which along with affirming the theological positions traditional to
evangelicalism, will encourage dialogue instead of division between
Christians who differ on abortion or homosexuality, will welcome
Christians with divergent political perspectives, will work for social
justice as well as personal salvation, will reject triumphalism that
seeks to impose the values of conservative Christianity on the wider
culture, and will affirm religious pluralism, while proclaiming the
uniqueness of Christ. Many of Campolo’s followers will find these
tenets appealing, but is a new evangelical movement necessary?
Campolo’s appeal for a new movement under the banner “progressive
evangelicalism” reveals a low ecclesiology indicative of Protestantism
in general and evangelical congregationalism in particular. There is
something in the Protestant DNA that tends toward division in the face
of differences. The church has already lived through a millennia-long
division between the Catholic west and the Orthodox east, a five
hundred year breach between Rome and the Reformers, and 2,000
subsequent schisms as the Reformation churches have splintered. I do
not minimize the significant differences that have led to division;
however, the same Spirit that calls the church to be a prophetic voice
for justice also calls the church to a visible unity of the baptized.
For the church to resist this call by affirming division and calling it
pluralism is sin.
Furthermore, this low ecclesiology is partly to blame for the very
weaknesses in the evangelical church critiqued by Campolo. One of the
reasons the evangelical church has been slow to take up the theme of
justice is that it preaches an individualized and privatized gospel.
Protestants rejected the Pope only to make every person in the pew
their own Pope. Ironically, this same tendency to privatize is what
allows Campolo to call for yet another movement. Furthermore, his call
for a new movement appears to undermine his own contention, as per the
gay issue, that these are not church dividing issues.
Instead of starting a new movement, progressive evangelicals like
Campolo should drink from wells already dug. For theological
conservatives who can’t buy into the social theology of the religious
right the prophetic tradition of the universal church is a better place
to land than the individualism of the Protestant churches (see Ron
Dart’s Christian Prophetic Tradition on this website).
Nevertheless, "Speaking My Mind" is a clear and persuasive work, not
only of personal testimony but also of intelligent witness to complex
issues that evangelicals sometimes treat as anything but complex. But
this book is not Campolo’s final word. He doesn’t write with
authoritarian dogmatism. Instead, he invites the reader to journey with
him. ”I have not finished thinking about the topics addressed in this
book. I expect to wrestle with some of them as long as I live and am
able to think." Thus, in "Speaking My Mind," we see a mind in motion,
not a mind made up.