GLBT, RLC, C st … a connection?

Here’s the Q:

I’ve written you several times before, and I’ve always been a big admirer. I respect your position on Sojourners rejection of the ad welcoming the gay couple to church; though I admit that my personal view is they should have accepted the ad. But I am pro-GLBT inclusion and I recognize that many in the Sojourners organization believe Paul prohibited gay relationships. The disagreements will have to stand as they are, and we must stand together gracefully in spite of them.
The one issue I am seeking clarification on is the relationship between Red Letter Christians, the C Street House, and the leaders of Uganda. Obviously, we know that the C Street House in Washington has developed close ties to Uganda in spite of that government’s stated view that gays and lesbians should be put to death. Recently, Tony Campolo wrote an article blasting the investigative work of the journalist Jeff Sharlett and defending the C Street House. (For the record, I found this article highly inflamatory considering that Campolo turned down Sharlett’s request for an interview multiple times, then turns around and writes an article blasting Sharlett. But that is Campolo’s business I suppose).
In defending the C Street House Campolo did make a very good point that Jesus dined with sinners. Clearly I see no issue with the Red Letter Christians sitting down at a table with the C Street House and the leaders of Uganda. But I do think it is your place to tell the leaders of Uganda that the murder of gays and lesbians is unChristian and unacceptable. I do think it is your place to tell the Congressional members of C Street that their continued opposition to defense cuts is not in keeping with the Sermon on the Mount. It seems to me that the purpose of the Red Letter Christians is to speak the truth to power. If I have said misinformed things please set me right.

Here’s the R:

Thanks for this question. A couple of things … First, as far as I know, Red Letter Christians is more of a loose network than a formal organization, eager to challenge Christians to pay more attention to the teaching of Jesus. But there really isn’t (as far as I’m aware) any kind of policy group or board. So with that in mind, this is the first I’ve heard about this issue, and I don’t know anything more about it than what you’ve written. I love Tony and have high respect for him, and we have the kind of friendship that is enriched through our disagreements (as we tried to model openly and cordially in the book we wrote together a few years ago.)
Second, I’ve had no experience with what Jeff Sharlett calls the Family. Since back in the 70’s, I’ve had occasional interaction with a group I’ve known as the Fellowship – but the folks I’ve met have been open-minded, open-hearted, and very different from the disturbing information Sharlett has uncovered. When I’ve been invited to Prayer Breakfast-related events, I’ve met a good mix of Republican and Democratic leaders – as you know, a rare thing in Washington these days. And in my experiences with the Fellowship, I never even heard of the C St house, much less received an invitation to it. In fact, I only learned about the C St strangeness through Jeff’s reporting, and via the Rachel Maddow show. Might the Fellowship (as I’ve experienced it) be a front organization for the Family (as Jeff describes it)? Or might the Family be the right-wing subgroup of the larger, more ecumenical Fellowship? Or might the situation be more complex than that? My hunch is the latter two of those options are the most likely.
Most importantly, I agree with you on the Uganda-gay issue. As you’ll see by using the search function on my site, I’ve been outspoken on this issue. And I also agree with you on the absurdity and immorality of protecting the military while we make the most vulnerable even more vulnerable. I’ll be doing some more writing on that in the weeks to come. I think the US is on the front end of a very difficult time in which some highly inconvenient truths will have to be faced.