The following is a letter Dr. Carl Ruby, VP Student Life, sent to the faculty and staff PRIOR to Shane’s arrival. While it doesn’t address their cancellation, it does explain why they wanted him in the first place and what they hoped to accomplish. Again, the reasons for the cancellation are not explained, but I hope you can see Dr. Ruby’s desires were noble in bring Shane, desires that I am sure will translate into a re-appearance sometime soon.

If I may also say, while I believe my alma mater bungled this one, I’m thankful there is a spirit of dialogue and a willingness to engage the Other, both inside and outside the Church. This cancellation was a very unfortunate situation that was caused by bad timing and rabid criticism, creating an unmanageable situation for the institution, the students, and Shane. Hopefully, they’ll learn from this and not empower the criticizers by bowing out next time a ‘controversial’ speaker is invited to speak.

I’ve become aware that some have chosen to use blogs to criticize our decision to bring a young author named Shane Claiborne to campus for an evening lecture on February 11. The blog that initiated this criticism also attacks friends like David Jeremiah, Tim LaHaye, Dallas Willard, James Dobson, Beth Moore, Kay Arthur, Charles Stanley, Chuck Swindoll and great organizations like AWANA, Intervarsity, National Day of Prayer, Youth With a Mission, and Moody Bible Institute. I believe that it is necessary to respond to their charges and explain why a theologically conservative institution like Cedarville sponsors academic discussions like the one that we are
anticipating on February 11.

Shane Claiborne, identified in his book as an evangelical Christian activist, is a very popular speaker and writer among college students. Other speaking engagements listed on his itinerary include the National Conference on Youth Ministries, the Zondervon Pastor’s Conference, Mount Vernon Nazarene College, Bethel College, Grace College, and Willow Creek. Shane is a strong advocate for Christian involvement in issues of justice like poverty and racial reconciliation.

I first heard of Shane Claiborne last summer when I saw a young college student from Cornerstone University reading a book called The Irresistible Revolution. She explained that all of the student leaders at Cornerstone had been asked to read this book over the summer. I picked up the book, began reading and discovered a fascinating story about a young man from Eastern College who stepped out of his comfort zone to assist the poor and homeless in Philadelphia. He also did an internship with Mother Theresa in Calcutta before concluding his education by doing another internship at Willow Creek and studying at Wheaton College.

The author of the blog identified Claiborne as an “emerging church activist.” While it is true that Claiborne is broader theologically than we are at Cedarville, I have never seen anything that identifies him as an official spokesman, or even a member of an emergent group. It is true that some of the people who have endorsed Claiborne’s book are active in the emergent movement. However, it was also positively endorsed by John Perkins, the founder of the Christian Community Development Association, who has spoken in Chapel twice, once under Dr. Dixon and more recently under Dr. Brown, and by Rob Moll, a Cedarville graduate who works as an editor for Christianity Today, and whom we recently honored as our Young Alumnus of the Year. Recommending the book, Rob Moll wrote, “This book will challenge you to sell all you have and to follow Jesus to the margins.” This is a challenge that I want our students to hear and consider.

While I have never heard Shane speak personally, I have checked with faculty and students who heard him speak at a Christian conference on community development. After getting a positive recommendation from a member of the Bible faculty who teaches courses in urban ministry,I asked one of my staff (Jon Purple, Dean of Student Life Programs) to explore the possibility of bringing Shane to campus for an evening lecture.

Things I Liked about The Irresistible Revolution

• It challenged me to consider whether I was being as attentive to the needs of the poor as I should be as a follower of Christ.
• It challenged me to think about how my faith in Christ, and my allegiance to scripture should inform my approach to politics. I fear that I have sometimes allowed my allegiance to a political perspective to shape my approach to scripture more than I have allowed scripture to define what my values are politically. I’m not where Shane is on many political issues, but he has caused me to take a hard look at a few of my blind spot.
• It challenged me to explore the relationship between my faith and my works, particularly acts of charity and a commitment to justice for the poor and the powerless. I’m troubled by the fact that sometimes people who don’t share my doctrinal convictions seem to do a much better job actually living out obedience to some of Christ’s teachings. Shane tells of his experience doing an internship with Mother Theresa. I wish there were more examples of conservative evangelicals engaged in that kind of ministry. I don’t support a move away from conservative theology, but I do long for a more liberal (in an appropriate Biblical sense) practice of obedience to Christ’s call to leave our stuff behind and follow him. It’s exciting to me to see that some Cedarville students have a growing sensitivity to this call.
• I also identified with Shane’s discomfort at being lumped together with other people who call themselves evangelical Christians, but then act or speak in ways that don’t seem much like Jesus. I interact with students every week who demonstrate a love for Jesus and have been hurt by “Christian” people, who can’t seem to translate that belief into behavior that models the godly virtues of patience, gentleness, humility, and kindness.

Things about Shane’s Book that Cause Concern

• In Shane’s effort to encourage more compassion toward people of other faiths, some feel that he hasn’t been clear enough about the exclusivity of the gospel. The writer of one critical blog selectively lifted quotations from a 2005 interview between Shane Claiborne and Tony Campolo (On Evangelicals and Interfaith Cooperation, Crosscurrents.org/ CompoloSpring 2005) making it look as though each of them were promoting doctrinal errors like universalism or inclusivity.
• I found the original article and I would agree that it includes statements (mostly by Campolo, not Claiborne), which raise concerns for us as conservative evangelicals. For example, Tony Campolo said, “I’ve got to believe that Jesus is the only Savior, but being a Christiain is not the only way to be saved.” Other similar statements raise legitimate questions about Campolo’s position on this matter. He seems to be trying to find a way to say that one can be saved by Jesus Christ without converting to Christianity if one is faithful to “truth as they perceive it.” Such an argument seems compassionate, but it fails to account for the fact that one can perceive truth inaccurately, and thereby remain lost. (Since Campolo’s position isn’t clear to me, I’ll send him this letter and ask him to clarify his position because I may be misunderstanding the point that he is trying to make.)
• I’ve never endorsed that article and I’m concerned with some of the things that Campolo seems to suggest, but I believe that the blogger’s use of selective quotations lifted out of context, falsely represents the positions of both Campolo and Claiborne. Honestly pointing out error or asking for clarification, seem like appropriate acts of Christian scholarship. Distorting a person’s message to make a point, by selective quotations lifted out of context, does not.
• I also believe that in fairness to Shane, it should be pointed out that he acknowledged the exclusive claims of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and rejected the idea that “all religions are one tree with many branches,” all leading to salvation. In fact, the following words, quoted from the same article demonstrate his interest in evangelism to people of other faiths. “The Muslims that I know are very interested in seeing another face of Christianity than that which they have encountered in the media….we may still want them to experience the love and faith of Jesus but how else will that happen apart form them seeing it in our lives.” [It should be noted that the entire article was partially in response to comments made by an Evangelical leader who said, “The only answer is to bomb all the terrorists off the face of the Earth in the name of the Lord.” Comments like this make it harder to reach non‐violent Muslims with the gospel. It is also important to acknowledge that the article was not about working with Muslims on evangelistic projects, rather, it was about the possibility of cooperating with them in things like disaster relief, humanitarian relief for victims of war, and issues of social justice. Finally, I want to note that I was not aware of this article until January 23, 2008 when these blogs surfaced.]
• In an effort to show respect for people of other faiths, and to recognize their good works, some feel that Shane does not place enough emphasis on real theological differences. Claiborne and Campolo discussed the issue of God’s grace extending to people of other faiths and it was not clear to me if they meant saving faith that alters a person’s eternal destiny, or the effects of common grace like Jesus talks about in Matthew 5 when he urges us to love our enemies and pray for those who misuse us, citing the fact that God sends sunshine and rain on both the righteous and the unrighteous. Shane also frequently commends Catholics for their leadership in areas of social work and social justice, recognizing them as brothers and sisters in Christ. I believe that an honest recognition of their good works doesn’t eliminate the need for a very careful evaluation of substantive doctrinal differences; differences, which I believe, could impact the eternal destiny of those we serve.

While I think it is fair for us to ask for more clarity about these doctrinal issues, I think we must also confess our failure to grapple with some of the tough sayings of Christ about the cost of discipleship, and we need to commend Shane for reminding us that God wants converted lives, not just converted beliefs. Discussing the challenge of reaching both homeless transsexuals and wealthy suburbanites with the gospel, Claiborne wrote, “I also became aware of how delicate that venture can prove to be. The temptation we face is to compromise the cost of discipleship, and in the process the Christian identity can be lost.…we can end up merely cheapening the very thing we want folks to experience. This is the cheap grace that [Dietrich Bonhoeffer] called the most deadly enemy of the church.”

• Finally, I would like to see Shane’s emphasis on a commitment to this type of discipleship complemented with a clearer discussion of the propositional truth claims of the Gospel. I believe that the Gospel message includes good works that attract people to Jesus and propositional statements about who Christ is and what he has done on the cross for our sins.

Even as I ask Shane to be mindful of the need for this kind of clarity, I am convicted of my own callousness and indifference to living in such a way that I earn the right to tell others about the Jesus that I love. I can become quite proud of my doctrinal clarity, but the truth is that I don’t share my faith nearly as often as I should and seldom do people come ask about the “hope that is within me.” If we are going to ask Shane to consider the need to be clearer in his articulation of the gospel, we better be sure that we are repentant in the areas where we need to be repentant and obedient in the areas where we must obey, otherwise we are like the foolish people described by Christ who ignore planks in our own eyes while we scratch away at the specks of dust in the eyes of others. I believe that Shane has something to teach us about following Christ, and I hope that a spirit of humility on our part will help him to accept our input and questions in a way that ultimately advances his efforts to live out the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

[Note: Shane’s doctrinal statement contains the following clear commitment to evangelism: “We affirm the importance of calling all persons to personal faith and faithful discipleship in following Jesus Christ. We recognize that this is done with words and without them.”]

How I would Like Students to Approach this Lecture

• Be inspired by Shane’s call (borrowed from a mentor) to “Choose Jesus and do something incredibly daring with your life.”
• Evaluate your life to see if it is full of gracious works that demonstrate the reality of your faith in Jesus Christ, particularly as it relates to ministry to the poor, the homeless, the hungry, and those in prison (Deuteronomy15: 7,8; Matthew 5:16; Matt. 25:34‐46; Romans 12:18‐21; Galatians 2:10; James 1:26,27).
• Treat this lecture just like you would a textbook, a film that you might watch in class, or an article that you discover while doing research that includes controversial statements. Allow scripture to shape your understanding of truth and be like the noble Bereans (Acts 17:11) who tested everything they heard by the standard of God’s word.
• Learn how to discuss theological differences in a way that honors both God’s word and the people whom God has created. The ultimate purpose of these discussions is to draw people toward Christ, to sharpen one another within the body of Christ, and to expose errors in the understanding of the gospel that may exist in our own lives, or in the lives of others.