Over the past couple of days, I’ve had the opportunity to watch both the HBO special, The Trials of Ted Haggard, and the interview that Haggard and his wife Gayle did with Oprah.
Some troubling stuff there.
Considering that both Oprah and Alexandra Pelosi are firmly in the camp that typically views Bible-believing fundamentalists as irrational nuts clinging to outdated ideas about homosexuality, I was really bothered that Haggard allowed his story to be used by them in such a way so as to further their case against most Evangelicals, who typically view homosexual tendencies as a temptation to be battled rather than an innate identity to be embraced.
In both appearances, Ted Haggard comes across as a very nice man who was boxed into dishonesty about his sexual identity because he identifies himself as an Evangelical. Pelosi’s documentary made Haggard look like the pathetic victim of a belief system that just needs to ditch its outmoded ideas about homosexuality and allow the poor guy to move back home and be loved by his church again. Oprah’s interview showcased Haggard’s newfound “honesty” about his mixed-up sexual orientation.
For someone who is supposedly going through a “restoration” process that most Christians assume contains at least an element of Godly sorrow for how his sins hurt New Life Church, Haggard came across as disgustingly eager to throw his former church under the bus in order to make people feel sorry for him.
Haggard had to have known that permitting Pelosi to follow him around with a camera as he showed off his sad new life of unemployment, disgrace, and relative poverty would make his former church and his board of overseers appear terribly mean-spirited to anyone who does not think that it’s a sin to be openly and actively gay.
Also, I have a hard time believing that Haggard didn’t deliberately paint his life as even more pathetic than it actually was, just for the sake of the camera. For instance, at one point in the documentary, Haggard gestured to a U-haul truck and made the statement that it contained “all” of his family’s earthly possessions. Considering that the Haggard family has now moved back into their Colorado Springs home, which they continued to own during the time that Pelosi was filming them in Arizona, that particular statement almost HAD to have been a blatant lie, as that U-haul truck obviously was not large enough to contain all the contents of their house. Unless the Haggards had had a gigantic garage sale before heading out to Arizona, they still had a bunch of “earthly possessions” that were stored somewhere else besides inside that small U-haul truck.
Also, maybe I’m missing something, but I have a hard time understanding how the Haggard family could have really been in such dire financial straits so quickly, since it is a fact that New Life Church paid them somewhere in the neighborhood of $300,000 in severance.
It was bad to watch Mr. Haggard buddy around with Oprah on her show, too. Not only did he seem just a little bit too comfortable with all the attention as he appeared to revel in the psychobabble about his “complicated” sexuality - he also never spoke up to clearly disagree with Oprah’s continued (and rather forceful) assertions that by denying his gay feelings (and not permitting himself to act out on them), he was denying who he was.
It was especially painful when Haggard’s wife Gayle attempted to state the typical biblical position that not every tendency is meant to be embraced…that there are elements of choice in terms of which behaviors we decide to pursue. You’d think that the former pastor would have been all over that one – or at least, that he would have clearly stood with his wife, who has so faithfully stood with him. But no. Watch this portion of the interview for yourself:
(Random aside: does anyone else join me in thinking that the Haggards’ body language toward each other does not bode well for their relationship? They sit on Oprah’s couch with knees angled away from each other, putting practically as much physical distance between themselves as they can.)
The whole thing begs the question, why is Haggard willingly putting himself back in the public eye, particularly in venues where he’s got to know that his story makes traditional Christians – like the pasty-faced and poufy-haired ”suits” who comprised the board of overseers responsible for setting the terms of his dismissal and restoration process – look bad?
Anyone savvy enough to have once been the president of the National Association of Evangelicals has got to be savvy enough to understand that in the world’s eyes, nobody should ever “struggle” against his gay feelings in the first place.
It’s a funny thing, but when Ted Haggard was initially disgraced for his bizarre secret life, I actually felt sorry for him. Any honest Christian knows how far one’s own life all too often falls from the ideals that the Bible sets out. We all have struggles, and we will all sin, even after we become “new creatures in Christ Jesus.” Mr. Haggard’s particular sins were perhaps more dramatic than the run-of-the-mill stuff that most of us battle, but nonetheless, my heart went out to him.
Now, though, I’m starting to think that Ted Haggard has bigger issues than merely struggling with a sexual attraction to men. He seems to have an almost pathological need for attention and sympathy. Before he’s ever declared “officially restored,” I hope that he and his therapist explore what drove him to seek such attention and sympathy from those – Oprah and Pelosi, and also the world at large – who do not share his purported values.
I got to watch the documentary today, and it troubles me. There doesn’t seem to be much repentance here. His complaints about the church turning him out don’t jive. In 1 Corinthians 5, Paul tells the church to remove from their fellowship a man involved in sexual sin. Verse 5: “Then you must throw this man out and hand him over to Satan so that his sinful nature will be destroyed and he himself will be saved on the day the Lord returns.”
In 2 Corinthians 2, Paul talks about opposing a man who caused trouble. We don’t know if it’s the same man as above. But in verses 5-8, Paul says:
“I am not overstating it when I say that the man who caused all the trouble hurt all of you more than he hurt me. Most of you opposed him, and that was punishment enough. Now, however, it is time to forgive and comfort him. Otherwise he may be overcome by discouragement. So I urge you now to reaffirm your love for him.”
So it looks like the people at New Life were doing just what Scripture told them to do. Except Haggard doesn’t seem to see it.
I also have questions about the money situation. His salary was more than $130,000 a year when he left the church. He must have had retirement, home allowance, car allowance, etc. What was he doing with his money? Where did it go? And how was he down to nothing so quickly?
And then it comes out that he had an “inappropriate relationship” with a church volunteer in 2006, and the church paid to hush it up.
Maybe all that needs to be exposed has not come into the light yet.
TLC,
I’d agree with you that Haggard’s church appears to have bent over backward in their dealings with him. That’s why it bothered me to see him so willing to let a secular and liberal filmmaker like Alexandra Pelosi follow him around with her camera. He simply HAD to have known that by showing himself as this pathetic poor soul hoofing it to one unsuccessful job interview after another, and then later trying to be a door-to-door salesman, he would by default be making his former church look mean and unmerciful.
Since the secular media is already hyper-sensitive to “judmental” Christians, why would Haggard do such a thing to New Life Church, by permitting himself to be shown as the victim, with his former church as the bad guy who forced him and his family out of town?
Seems to me he is simply trying to clean up his tarnished image.
I don’t even think that his “new honesty,” so touted on the Oprah show, is really all that honest. At one point he explained that his thing with male escort Mike Jones came about because “sex play” that he’d done as a young adolescent and the same-sex attractions that he’d stuffed down his whole adult life had “suddenly” come to the surface when he’d turned 50.
That doesn’t jive very well with the news of Grant Haas, the New Life intern, who recently came forward with his phone recordings of conversations he’d had with Haggard. Haas said in news interviews that Haggard had sent him thousands of text messages in which he’d, among other things, told Haas about the different encounters that he’d (Haggard) had while on the road.
So on Oprah, Haggard is acting like his problem manifested itself in one isolated incident with Mike Jones. But the truth would appear to indicate that this didn’t just “bubble to the surface” when Haggard recently turned 50.
So much for Haggard’s appearance on Oprah being about HONESTY.
Also, something interesting from the Trials (Pelosi) documentary.
I wonder if anyone else remembers the clips it showed of Haggard preaching that were dated, I believe, from the late 90s.
The sermon snippet was of Haggard preaching to New Life Church. In the sermon, he gave what I guess was an illustration, in which he discussed how he and a friend had a habit of walking and praying together. One day, lo and behold, they’d walked so far and had lost track of where they were that they looked up and realized they were in the parking lot of a gay bar.
The crowd was clearly spellbound and laughed uproariously as Haggard joked about running into someone in the parking lot and being asked if he and his friend “were together.” He was pretty comedic as he recounted being flustered and of course answering, “Yes,” and then suddenly realizing what the person was thinking and changing his answer to, “No!”
And then – and I’m not sure if this preaching clip was from the same sermon, or another – there was a similar story of Haggard deciding to turn into the parking lot of a gay bar, when suddenly a man from his church came out the door. He had the man get in his car, and he confronted the man, who burst into tears and made a decision on the spot to surrender his life to Christ.
I have to say that in the moment, Haggard was completely believable as he shared those stories. You could tell that the crowd was completely swayed by the thought of what a great man of God he was, and, moreover, how wonderful it was that another man had been turned from a lifestyle of homosexuality.
HOWEVER, in light of what we now know about Haggard’s secret life, I couldn’t help but wonder if those sermon illustrations were merely a clever way of covering for himself and the things that he was already doing, even back then. Maybe he was offering up an explanation for why people might see him in the parking lot of a gay bar.
Both stories just seemed a little bit strange, even as it was obvious that his crowd was totally with him.
I finally watched the movie Jesus Camp two days ago. I won’t comment on the rest of the film here, but there is a very odd clip in it of Ted Haggard speaking out against homosexuality in a sermon. The film came out before this controversy arose. Seeing is believing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6rSjrBhUIA .
In the end, I don’t think there is a good rational reason why Ted Haggard would want to make the event more public than it already was. I thought New Life Church handled the situation in a biblical manner and did a good job of moving on. It’s sad that this is still an issue because there are a lot of good people in that church who’ve probably been deeply hurt by this sad turn of events.
I saw the HBO special on Haggard almost in its entirety, but I wasn’t able to tolerate watching him on Oprah — mainly because of Oprah’s very condescending, superior , and judgmeental attitude toward Haggard, his wife and the Christian belief that “homosexuality is wrong”.
However, I think that the problem that we will not discuss as Christians and come to a resolution on is how we consider sexuality — Is it a behavior or an identity? By this I mean I don’t consider my sexual preferences to be essential to who I am as a person. As a Christian I am called to live a holy life according to the dictates of Scripture and the Spirit of God — the whole counsel of God. Regardless of how I feel or think, I am required to live a life pleasing to God.
This means that I should do everything to daily deny myself, take up my cross and follow Jesus. So, it really doesn’t matter what temptations I have that are contrary to the will of God, I must strive to overcome them. Now, if we want to focus on sexuality, then if I am unmarried to a person of the opposite sex, I must live a celibate life. Period. It doesn’t matter what kind of attractions I have, be they opposite sex, same sex, or both sexes I must not act on them outside of the bounds of marriage.
But, if you notice, this seems to be a non-discussed issue in Christendom tody. The actual thought that we are to lay down our lives in pursuit of pleasing God — hence we have all of these false doctrines that really amount to nothing but plans to make god give us what w want. But, I digress….
When I often discuss this issue I often pose these questions:
What is the difference between a celibate”homosexual” and a celibate “heterosexual” Christian? Should one be allowed to serve in ministry and one not?
Thanks so much for the log and post…..very thoughtful, indeed. And I agree with you, Haggard has many issues besides his same sex attraction. He and and his family (as well as others who are struggling with the same issues) really need our prayers.
Charismania,
I noticed that you are posting about once or twice a month. I am a voracious consumer of post-charismatic information. It is very healing to me. While I have read several similarly themed sites, yours is the first that I really REALLY relate to. I’m sure you have a real life, but I wish you posted more. Or maybe you could locate a forum for your blog.
Just sayin.
Hey, Brian -
Thanks for your comments, and welcome to the site!
I’m glad that you’ve found something helpful for you here. The process of leaving Charismania and recovering from it is…well…a process. It’s strange, because I’ll think that I am SO over our old church. We’ve been gone from there for two years already, and we are happy in a new church, with more friends than we’d ever had at Living Word. You’d think that that would be enough. And most of the time, it IS enough.
But every once in awhile, I will feel a sudden pang of sadness as I think back on how…exciting…church used to be at Living Word. Seriously. There was this sense that you just never knew what you might miss if you weren’t there. There was this sense of excitement, of anticipation, in the air…especially at the beginning of our time there. (Later, after we’d been at every service for several years, we realized that things actually DID follow a rather predictable unpredictability, if you know what I mean. But at the beginning, we only saw the newness, the sense that anything might happen.)
And sometimes, I find myself missing that.
And yet, what do I actually miss?
The truth is that none of the “cool stuff” – the healings, the “manifest presence of God” – ever actually happened in the way that we were led to expect. Nobody ever jumped out of a wheelchair. We never were hit over the head by a “wave of glory.” We never saw the huge overflowing crowds that had been prophesied again and again. If anything, attendance ebbed and flowed and sometimes even seemed to decrease.
So I don’t miss the miraculous, because we never actually SAW the miraculous.
But I do miss my wide-eyed and completely believing sense that anything could – and WOULD – happen. I miss thinking that we’d found the absolute perfect church. I miss believing in all the “magical” thinking.
Sometimes.
Most of the time, I’m much happier where we are now, and I know that it’s a much healthier, much more Bible-based place, much more rooted in the realities of the Gospel and God’s love and grace and truth.
But as we continue on our journey away from Charismania, I will admit that it is a healing process. One that takes time…apparently at least more than two years.
I’m going to try to post something soon. I have several article ideas in the hopper. Check back again, and you may see something new.
Charismania,
Your Feb 22 reply to Brian really struck a chord with me. I think particularly it describes my husband’s “grieving” over what we had to leave. The church we left was not as blatantly over the top as the one you describe, but still, as we have come out of that church over two years ago, I can see how we were headed down the slippery slope of dominionism/shepharding/thirdwave/prosperity thinking.
I do not want that mixture of truth and error anymore, but I do miss the feeling of momentum, and that anything could happen. I am still deconstructing. We headed right into another church, because we believe we should be a part of a local body, but perhaps we just delayed the process.
Anyway, just wanted to say “I relate.”
One thing that has helped me to grab a hold of a completely opposite perspective (opposite of consumer charismania) is reading first hand accounts of persecuted believers in other countries. No personal agendas, no fame, no glory. Just faithfulness even unto death.
Charismania,
I understand completely what your saying about missing the Wide-eyed feeling that anything could happen. I missed that also after leaving. I would go back from time to time telling myself that I was so hungry for a move of the Holy Spirit. (I needed my Holy Spirit fix) The sad part is I found out it was like the wizard of oz. It was just a little old man behind a curtian using smoke and mirrors.
When I returned a time or two to get my fix I saw the fake clearly. The Father in His mercy had opened my eyes and there was no going back. Now I must admit; in the early years when I believed it all it was a exciting show. No one was ever healed. No one was ever set free. Same people week after week in the prayer line getting prayer for the same thing.
Yea, there was shouting I’m free, dancing whopping and hollering. Falling down and slain in the Spirit. Words, prophecy, tongues, interpertation of tongues, But no lasting fruit.
The wide-eyed excitement was gone. It was like the first christmas you were old enough to know there was no santa clause. You wanted to go back to that wide-eyed-child-belief. You felt sad learning it was all fake.
Maybe what we have done is matured In Christ Jesus. Being mature is not all about whooping & hollering, falling out in the spirit. It just might be about the Great Commission. You think?
Blessing,
Sherry Lee
Hi, ruthsongs -
Thanks for your comment, and welcome to the site!
When we left our former church, I searched long and hard for resources that addressed the struggles I was having, and I never really found much. That’s the main reason why we put up this site. There are lots of spots online where deception is discussed, but I’ve never found a whole lot that articulates the mixed feelings involved in leaving. You know?
I’ve mentioned this before, but I’ll repeat myself.
It really reminds me of what it’s like to break off a dysfunctional romantic relationship with a highly alluring but “bad-boy” boyfriend. You know in your heart that the break-up is the best thing for you, and most of the time you’re OK with it, quite happy and relieved that you’ve moved on with your life.
But there are times when you remember the excitement, and what it felt like to “live on the edge,” and there will be certain songs that you hear that can take you right back to those feelings…
Personally, I’ll have these flashbacks when I drive past the church facility. I’ll be hit by the feelings of excitement and anticipation that I used to experience when we’d pull up to the church and drive into the parking lot. Some of it had to do with what I thought the Lord was going to do…but most of it was more about the little kingdom that Pastor Smith and his family had created there, and how we would fit into that kingdom.
I’m embarrassed to admit this now, but I used to daydream about running into Mary Smith in the mall or something, and what it’d be like to strike up a conversation with her. When we were new to Living Word, I actually thought that maybe we could become friends, where she could be something of a spiritual mentor to me. The glittery perfection that she seemed to exude was very appealing, something to strive for. Looking back, I think that a good part of what attracted me to Living Word was the idea that somehow, if I could tap into what the Smith family had tapped into, I could live a life of financial ease and also have miracle-working power at my disposal.
And the way to tap into the Smiths’ “power” was to be around them (I’d probably have called it, “being near the anointing,” even though it REALLY was “being near THEM”).
So every time we pulled into the church parking lot, we were soon to have another opportunity to be near the Smiths’ greatness, or whatever you’d want to call their aura of power and celebrity.
Yes, some of it was about my faith in God. But during our time at Living Word, my faith in God got all tangled up in my thoughts with my faith in the Smiths and their “anointing.” Looking back, I’m pretty sure this happened because they wanted it to. They poured an awful lot of effort into talking about their anointing and setting themselves up as very highly special and unusual and untouchable.
It’s difficult to leave this kind of world…and difficult to articulate why it’s difficult…
“Looking back, I think that a good part of what attracted me to Living Word was the idea that somehow, if I could tap into what the Smith family had tapped into, I could live a life of financial ease and also have miracle-working power at my disposal.
And the way to tap into the Smiths’ “power” was to be around them (I’d probably have called it, “being near the anointing,” even though it REALLY was “being near THEM”).”
Oh mamma! Ain’t that the truth. Anoiting lust.