Christian Ethics: From the Blue Point of the Flame
A Conversation with Tony Campolo
Professor of Sociology, Eastern College
Saint Davids, Pennsylvania
Q. Tony, where did you get your social conscience?
A. This is going to sound very unimpressive, but as a kid I got converted and just read the Bible. I think that the problem with most of us is that we grow up in a church that teaches us to read into the Bible instead of growing up in a church that just says read the Bible. When you read the Bible and don`t read into it, you will find that the Bible calls people every bit as much to champion social justice as it calls people to individually express love.
Q. How did you get started down this road of troubling Israel about doing the gospel?
A. Very simple. I grew up in an evangelical, fundamentalist church and they told me to preach the Bible. That`s what I do. I preach the Bible. People say I preach a social gospel. I don`t know whether it`s a social gospel or a individualist gospel, all I know is, I read the Bible and I preach what`s there. That`s what makes me dangerous in evangelical circles-because I preach what the Bible says. This is not what Tony Campolo says, it`s not what Reinhold Niebuhr says, it`s what the Bible says. The Bible is the most troubling book that anybody can read. I look at 1 John 3:17-18 and it says, "If you have this world`s goods, you see brothers and sisters in need, you keep what you have while they suffer. How can you say you have the love of God in your heart?" Now that`s a troubling verse.
Q. Who most warmly embraces your message about the relevance of Christianity to daily life?
A. Well, it has been, up to lately, the young people in the evangelical church, particularly those who are from evangelical Christian colleges. They grew up in a context where Christianity was totally individualistic; but they know that there`s something more to it than that. When I speak, I do not tell them things that they don`t know. I tell them things that they already know but which they have never heard articulated from the pulpit. When I finish speaking, I don`t have young people come up to me and say, "I never heard that before; I never thought of that before." They say, "That`s what I`ve always believed, but you`re the first one that I`ve heard put it into words for me."
Q. Who most vigorously resists your message in support of relevant religion?
A. Well, I think that people who have become overly patriotic. I think that patriotism often comes very close to idolatry. When I speak what the Bible says, it challenges what it means to be a wealthy, middle class American. We all want a Christianity that does not disturb middle class, conservative values. The Bible does that; and those with the vested interests in those values give me the hardest time.
Q. What do you make of the Biblical word that the just shall live by faith? This is a new insight that I`ve been wrestling with lately. It doesn`t say the submissive shall live by faith; it says the just shall live by faith.
A. You`ve hit on something that people haven`t yet reached. They love that verse and they put the emphasis on faith instead of just. If we are to be people of faith, we must be people of justice not merely people of faith. If you say that the just shall live by faith, you are saying that in our living we must be just people. Thus, the word faith has profound meaning for us. Faith, according to Hebrews 11:1, "is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." To be a person of faith and committed to justice is to have a vision of the world that ought to be-a world without racism, a world without sexism, a world without homophobia, a world without poverty. If we have faith, we have hopes for such a world. Even now we have evidence of such a world which we have not yet seen but which we know is coming. That`s the Kingdom of God.
Q. From an ethical perspective, would you evaluate today`s phenomenon of radio and television "talk shows"?
A. I think that they have become an incredibly powerful influence on the American consciousness. In the last election, 37% of those who voted contended that their votes were highly influenced by radio talk shows. I just finished doing one before I got on the phone with you and the language that is used is sensationalist but it is also inflammatory. For instance, when I was talking about a society that has compassion towards the poor, the talk show artist said, "That`s communism." When we talked about the fact that only 5 cents out of every dollar that you pay in taxes actually goes to help poor people, he said, "I`m tired of the government putting a gun to my head and demanding that I pay poor people." When you start talking about the government holding guns to your heads.. .when you start saying that compassion is communism, then you have set up the conditions where people feel justified in joining militias. I don`t think there would be the kind of militia movement in America that resulted in the Oklahoma City bombing if there weren`t the kind of talk shows that we have on radio.
Q. Do the columnists and professional or programmed writers of letters to the editor have comparable influence in the ethics arena today?
A. No. I think that Neil Postman in his book Amusing Ourselves to Death and Marshall McLuhan in his book Understanding Media make it clear that we have gone through a social transition in America. We are no longer a literate people. We are a people whose consciousness is molded by entertaining verbal and visual programming. Thus, if we are going to get our message to this generation, we have got to master the techniques of communicating the eternal truths in the context of the new media.
Q. What do you make of the current talk about values?
A. There is a sense across this country that there is a moral abyss in this nation, that the social problems of our time are correlated with a spiritual crisis. There is consensus on the left and on the right that we are in a time of spiritual crisis. However, we have not rightly identified the source of that spiritual crisis. I`m going to sound like a fundamentalist but here`s what I`m going to say. I do not think that either the evangelical or the liberal communities have evaluated yet the impact of the Vietnam War on the value system and morality of this country. We were wrong in Vietnam. Now even McNamara who was a major leader in support of our nation`s involvement in Vietnam says we were wrong. We sent 60,000 American men and women to their deaths half way across the world in order to preserve the myth of the past. We not only did that, but we killed 3 million Vietnamese people. The Bible is clear that nations as well as individuals can sin; and we sinned in Vietnam. A generation of young people knew that we were involved in great corporate sin. They knew that as a nation we were immoral. The church, particularly my church-the evangelical church-supported that war without question. It`s impossible to come back and talk to those kids about moral values on the personal level when you have violated every principle of justice on the societal level. Our moral integrity as a Christian community was compromised in Vietnam; and until we repent, we will not have the kind of integrity as a people that will enable us to speak with authority.
Q. So the current talk about values is not even pointed in the right direction?
A. It`s not seeing the cause of why there are no values. Namely, when we went to Vietnam, we pillaged and we killed and we did it for pragmatic reasons. We talked about domino theories, we talked about national pride, we talked about a lot of reasons for being there that had nothing to do with Biblical values. We lost our values in Vietnam and that`s coming back to haunt us now.
Q. Of course this is a profoundly important subject, but let me move on to the next one because we could do a lot of articles on that subject alone….
A. The impact of Vietnam on American morals and values, the way in which our morals and values were destroyed has made us incapable of speaking to this generation about values and morals with any degree of authority.
Q. Well, where are the most fertile grounds in which the seeds of Christian ethics can most successfully be sown and cultivated?
A. Interestingly enough, I would say that it`s among the intelligent fundamentalists. The intelligent fundamentalists have a commitment to the Bible, and with that commitment they also have a zeal. If you want to know where religious zeal is located, it`s not in our mainline church youth groups. It`s in the Inter-Varsity and Campus Crusade youth groups. That`s where the zeal is; that`s where the enthusiasm is. They have a deep commitment to Scripture. What we need is a generation of preachers that will interpret and point out what the Scriptures really say. When they really get into the Bible, they become intensely socially conscious. The strongest environmental movements right now are being generated in evangelical circles. The strongest commitment to opposing racism and even opposition to homophobia is being mustered and being organized within the evangelical community.
Q. Is there a notable relationship between currently booming Pentecostalism and currently languishing Christian social ethics?
A. In the United States there is; in other countries, there isn`t. Let me point out that in Latin America, Pentecostalism is aligned with efforts to facilitate social change for the poor. In the United States, Pentecostalism is often an instrument of sidetracking people. Case in point: The Vineyard Movement with it`s signs and wonders saying that because we are already living in the kingdom of God, therefore we should see signs and wonders-healings and speaking in tongues and all of that. That`s what the Vineyard Movement says are the signs of the Kingdom. Here`s what Jesus says are the signs of the Kingdom: that the hungry are fed, that the naked are clothed, that the poor have good news preached to them. I believe in the Kingdom theology. If we understand that the signs of the Kingdom of God are Pentecostal wonders, however, we are sidetracked from what Jesus says the signs of the Kingdom are. There is a political motivation behind all of this. Those in positions of wealth and power want the church to think that the signs of the Kingdom of God breaking loose in our midst are Pentecostal miracles. I am for Pentecostal miracles, I believe in them, but they are not the signs of the Kingdom. The signs of the Kingdom are those signs which are outlined by Jesus in Luke 4.
Q. How is the current rhubarb about Calvinism likely to affect the cause of Christian ethics?
A. Well, Calvinism is revived primarily in the South, particularly at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. But I`ve got to tell you, there are very few people who are real Calvinists. We are all Calvinists in our heads; but functionally we are Armenians,- As long as Baptists give invitations and plead with people to come down the aisle to fifty verses of "Just As I Am" they are contradicting Calvinism.
Q. What effect on the cause of Christian social concerns can be expected from the current roll of Fundamentalism?
A. I think that the problem is that evangelical Christianity and especially fundamentalism has become so closely aligned with the Religious Right that the word evangelical has become almost synonymous with Religious Right. You probably picked up from the newspapers that we were down in Washington a few days ago to initiate what we call the Progressive Evangelical Network-a new movement that is trying to break the hold which the Religious Right has on the evangelical community. But in answer to your question, let me just say, that the total effect is this: fundamentalism is closely aligned with the Religious Right which is using religion as a political instrument to annihilate programs of compassion that have helped poor people over the last few decades. Of course this is a devastating blow to our Christian witness.
Q. Are they a tool of other forces in that effort?
A. Sometimes they are; sometimes they do it all by themselves.
Q. What should Christians do about all the trashing of public personalities which has been inundating America?
A. Have you picked up my articles about my challenging Jerry Falwell? My response is that we do have to challenge those within our own ranks who trash people. As I said on a radio program, what Jerry Falwell was doing would not pass the four-way test of Rotary let alone the admonition of the Apostle Paul in the book of Philippians that says only go for those things that are good and true and honest and beautiful.
Q. From your perspective as a sociologist, where does all of today`s hate rhetoric come from, what will be its effect, what should be done about it?
A. First of all, I think the hate rhetoric comes out of fear. People are frightened that what has been the affluent and prosperous way of life that they have enjoyed is about to be taken from them. There`s fear about job security; there`s fear that our children are not going to be as successful as we are. Fear is pervading the country. Within the context of fear, people always feel psychologically better off if they can pinpoint in simplistic terms the causes of their troubles. There are people on television and radio who love to do just that. Simplistically, they point to certain groups and certain individuals and suggest that they are the cause of our problems. For instance, I think that the gay and lesbian communities have become the new Jews. It is like what Hitler did in the 30s by saying the Jews are the cause of all of our problems so we must confine them, we must drive them from our midst. I find that frightened people led by fascist-type propagators of hate, demagogues, are turning on the homosexual community and acting as though gays and lesbians are the cause of all of our social problems and that they are the forces that are destroying the American family and that if we can just get rid of them, the American family can be restored and if the American family is restored, all will be well. That kind of simplistic rhetoric nurtures hate. I believe that it is through the foolishness of preaching that the power of God is released in the world; and we`ve got to preach against this stuff
Q. Is the hatred for big government a factor in that equation?
A. These people on radio are always saying that government in Washington is being taken over by gays and lesbians. You just listen to the rhetoric and how often they will say, Do you know how many gay people are in the government in Washington, D.C.? Do you know how many homosexuals have been appointed by President Clinton? I asked President Clinton about this because the most prominent radio speaker in America has said that President Clinton has appointed over 500 gays and lesbians as part of the federal White House program. I asked the President that question, Is that true? He said, "I suppose it is. Did this particular speaker mention that it was 500 out of 15,000 appointees?" I said, No. He said, "When you put it in that perspective, doesn`t it show the 500 to be actually a minute group?" I said, Indeed it does, one out of 30. Indeed we have a tendency to paint the picture in the worst possible light for political purposes.
Q. What have you read lately that has especially turned your motor over?
A. I like Jim Wallis`s new book, The Soul of Politics. He calls for a new kind of politics. He talks about a politics down on a grassroots level where the old, simplistic dichotomies that set liberals against conservatives and mainline denominations against evangelicals are overcome. It`s a new kind of politics that says to mainline churches, "We know you are scared of us. Don`t be afraid of us anymore. We want to be brothers and sisters in Christ and work together." We want to take the word evangelical from having a capital E to having a small e. We are evangelicals, not Evangelicals. You may not agree with everything we say theologically, but so what? We don`t agree with each other. Can`t we together look at the community in which we live, Democrats, Republicans, Roman Catholics, Jews, Protestants, Muslims, atheists, all people who have good will and then come together and begin to struggle with the problems of homelessness, with the problems of inadequate housing, with the problems of premarital pregnancy, and with the problems of drugs? We`ve got to start dealing with all these things on the local level. When you get down to the local level, everything changes. With Habitat For Humanity, Newt Gingrich and Bill Clinton can both wear the button on their lapel. Both are committed on the local level.
Q. What have you written lately that you like best?
A. There are two books coming out that I think are going to be important. One is Can Mainline Denominations Make a Comeback? It`s being published by Judson Press and I think it`s important because it analyzes from a sociological view what has happened to mainline denominations. It uses the American Baptist Church or convention, as a case study. It outlines structural changes and programmatic designs that will have to take place if, in fact, denominations are going to make a comeback. I have another book by Word to be released about the same time, in June, entitled Is Jesus a Democrat or Republican? It is timely.
Q. In your own life and work, where does your most gratifying fulfillment come from?
A. I refuse to be painted into the corner of
uninvolved, uncaring, uncompassionate, narrow sectarianism. I am envisioning a massive new student movement with young people going out from their church houses and nice college campuses into the communities, into the real world, to work on social needs and help real people. This vision carries the promise of fantastic fulfillment.
Q. What have you done lately that seems most important to you?
A. Last Tuesday we had eleven prominent evangelical leaders go down to Washington and hold a press conference to announce that the stereotypical image of evangelicalism is not valid and that we have committed ourselves to forming a new progressive evangelical network that will do the following things:
First, we`re going to be attending the evangelical functions like the National Religious Broadcasters, the Bookseller`s Convention and the National Association of Evangelicals meetings; and we are going to be saying, "We think you have forgotten a dimension of the gospel. We think that you have allowed this organization to become too aligned with the Religious Right." We`re going to point out that the speakers of the National Religious Broadcasters last year were Ralph Reed, Pat Robertson, Oliver North, and Dan Quayle. When that becomes your entire diet, you have, in fact, said something about what`s happening to you. You need to get more balanced. Those voices have a right to be heard, but there are other voices that are just as important that need to be heard and we need balance,
Second, we are initiating in communities all across the country a grassroots organization to do community politics in accordance with what I said earlier. These caucuses of like-minded people all across the country will become a network of activist Christians engaged in community-based initiatives on behalf of the poor, in support of justice.
Q. What is our best hope for good passage through today`s troubled ethical waters?
A. Simple. Prayer and fasting. I really do mean that. Learn to pray. Prayer is where we get a sense of righteousness and justice and God`s leading.
Christian Ethics Today: Thanks, Tony, and God bless you.
