
By November of 2006 Ted Haggard was at his professional peak: pastor of the humongous New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Colorado, and leader of the National Association of Evangelicals, an organization of 45,000 churches whose mission is to consolidate the influence of American Protestant Christians. And Pastor Ted was indeed influential, so much so that he exuded a disarming generosity to his political opponents and the media, using his winning personality and cutting edge technology to spread Christ’s teachings and hold sway with the Bush White House, the Republican Party, and conservatives in general. Interviews with Haggard for documentaries show an enormously likeable man who talked about sex often and comfortably. His position on the subject: homosexual sex is wrong, as made crystal clear in the bible, and heterosexual sex between married, evangelical spouses is better and more frequent than that of the general population. His pronouncements, offensive and reductive to some, are tempered by his miles-wide smile, broadly open face, and almost girlfriend-like demeanor, a man whose persona, admittedly filtered through youtube.com, seems incapable of true exclusion in any kind of personal way.
~ ~ ~
After days of speculation among television talking heads about allegations that Haggard had sex with and bought drugs from a male prostitute, an apparently chastened Pastor Ted admitted to the nation and his congregation that he had engaged in occasional sin (“immoral sexual behavior”) with the accuser and had consequently agreed to resign his position at both his own church and the national alliance. He was instant fodder for pundits, and particularly ridiculed months later when, after a mere three weeks of intensive, preacher-administered therapy, he was pronounced “completely heterosexual.”
Who on earth believed that? Sophisticates knew instantly that the so-called therapy was a sham, beyond even the typical faith-healing, TV evangelist con act. This was among the most obvious, simplistic solutions to a political embarrassment to come along in a while. But his followers and the knee-jerk religious conservatives—surely they know as well? Surely they see not only the expedience of the slick recovery but that the man is clearly, clearly, gay—Don’t they?
David France wrote in a feature piece for New York Magazine that “gaydar,” the sense of knowing without any affirmation that someone is gay, is legitimate; that is, that there are particular physiological characteristics that occur, in statistical significance, in the homosexual population. He acknowledges that those who claim that Ted Haggard’s sexual orientation was something less than a revelation were operating on an intuitive understanding based on science. The information is fascinating: gays are more likely to have counterclockwise hair whorls and longer index fingers as compared to their ring fingers, for example. France, who himself is gay, has collected the conclusions from a growing body of research in the field[1] and expresses ambivalence at how the information will be received. He is mostly optimistic that this kind of work will ultimately gain rights for gays and steal some ammunition from those who dismiss sexual preference as a choice and, worse, consider gays sinners and subhuman. He understands, though, that the complexity unfolding—the confounding riddle that only 50 percent of gay identical twins share a sexual orientation with their siblings, for example—could also cement bias, and that the newly identified shared traits, like hair whorls, could become red flags that invite mistreatment.
~ ~ ~
Just over three years later, Ted Haggard is in the news again, making the rounds with his wife Gayle, who wrote a book about forgiveness and “the marriage I’ve always longed for,” as she told Meredith Viera of NBC. Haggard’s trials, apparently, are no more organic than a dieter who says “I’m not going to eat that today,” and then eats that today. To Oprah Winfrey’s question, “Are you gay?” Haggard says he did wonder about that. He asked a therapist, “Am I gay? Am I straight? Am I bi? What am I?" I find his recounting poignant--both for his naivte in the asking and for the potential for devastation in the answers. His therapist’s response seems to sit well with him: “You are a heterosexual. With homosexual attachments.”
I feel weary just imagining the complexity of living a life as inauthentic as Haggard. But my contempt for the man’s foolish self-deception falls away when I realize that he, like all of us, is suffering the indignity of existence. He is journeying through the same muck of fear and anxiety as we are. Plato said it best: “Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.”


Salon.com
Comments
This is really, really interesting, and surpassingly fair and kind. It is so easy to judge and condemn a man like Haggard for "letting the side down," and perpetuating discrimination and wrongheaded beliefs about sexuality. At the end of the day, though, he has to live the rest of his life and live with himself and live with his decisions and not for the benefit of any other cause or person. Emphatic "R."
Then I saw a documentary about him - was it on HBO? - a year or two ago. And yes, I understand what you're saying. I just feel sorry for the guy. He's a Positive presence, and the sooner he learns how to just be himself, the sooner he can apply that positivity toward doing good for others, something to which he's obviously drawn.
I didn't expect to feel this way, but I could not condemn this man.
Great piece!
I share Connie's hope that he can put his personal charisma and seeming desire to help others to a positive and authentic use some day.
Perhaps the people he can now minister to are in a similar purgatory of half-denial, and can take comfort in following someone as conflicted as themselves.
Lordy, what a web we weave... (r)
Haggard strikes me as a spiteful man. Sure, he's probably spiteful because he's a closet case and a head case, but is it always OK to cause others harm because one has issues of one's own?
I have a hard time mustering any sympathy for the man.
He's a liar and a coward.
I don't give a shit what he does -- but it just sounds to me (as a former drug user) like he's giving lipservice when he jokes about how he lied when he said he threw away the crystalmeth -- and gets a laugh from the audience. He's still "on" -- he's clawing tooth and nail to get back in the good graces of the people who made him so rich & famous.
He still makes it seem as if homosexuals are bad -- he seems to lump them together with drug users.
Go away Ted Haggard. Go get some humility.
Regarding the merit of the compassion angle, I've been thinking about it. I appreciate the comments representing the angry or cynical view, and I know someone who thinks Haggard is actually doing harm. I realized today that I feel less angry about him than I did during the Bush years, if that makes any sense at all. The political influence among religious conservatives at that time worried me, because I know that they constituted a voting bloc that didn't agree with my values, and I didn't like any encouragement of power.
Mostly, I draw a distinction between the anti-gay ravings of an influential, ultra-right heterosexual man and those of a gay man in denial. There's an editor and columnist at The Plain Dealer who is uber conservative, whose anti-gay views border on the paranoid, and I wrote to him once accusing him of just such a thing, that he was doing harm. I absolutely get that--the idea that someone like this Kevin O'Brien could influence readers who want permission to remain ideologically inflexible, and those readers could in turn influence their children into self-loathing or cruelty to others based on the intolerant views.
But there's something just pathetic about Ted Haggard. I don't buy that anybody in the whole world, much less young people, are looking to him for counsel or mentoring. I don't think he has that kind of clout anymore. Mary, what you say about systems is true, but the fact that Haggard could have found some support with gay Christians suggests he's genuinely in denial. And he could just as easily hawk books that said, "Hey, I'm Pastor Ted, and I'm OUT!" with his big goofy smile and a foreword by Ellen Degeneres.
Yes, I have compassion for all who struggle with identity and faith. Yes, everyone is "fighting a hard battle." It's the hypocrisy that bothers me deeply. Haggard was --still is to many-- a spiritual leader, holding his flock to a higher moral standard than he was willing to follow. I wonder what would have happened if he'd never been found out.
But it's a basic human right to be able to define your own life for yourself, and to live your life in accordance with who you believe you truly are.
Ted Haggard has chosen to define himself as a heterosexual, but with homosexual inclinations. That means that he will live as a heterosexual, while continuing to struggle with homosexual desires. Surely that cannot be easy.
In other words, he's chosen his own suffering and identity, based on his own values, based on the things that are most important to him. And if "closeted homosexuals" or others can't live with that, too bad for them. They don't walk in his shoes, and they don't have his life experiences and history.
I personally wish him well, and hope that the life he has chosen proves to be all that he hopes it will be.
For those who talk about hypocrisy, I'm hoping for a little discussion about the notion of self-deception. Can one be a hypocrite if he's lying to himself? I'm not so sure. But then again, there's certainly some ambiguity about whether he's lying to himself at all rather than just lying to everyone else. I still don't know why, at this point, unless he genuinely feels either a deep denial or deep struggle with what he considers to be his own sinful nature. In either case, that feels worthy of compassion to me. I think the only case which doesn't--if he's merely tromping around capitalizing on the public's gullibility in spite of some internal gleeful knowledge of his own real nature and in cahoots with his wife--isn't likely. When I watched the video of him with Oprah, I can only say this: I believe him. Which is to say, I believe he believes himself.
Several people who have experienced the world from whence Ted came, including myself, have varying degrees of suspicion or judgement or compassion regarding his situation. I find myself with mixed feelings (what a surprise). Can I believe that he believes his own line of reasoning? Yes. The pressure to toe the company line is extremely strong for any "true believer," let alone for someone who is "called by God." After all, in addition to losing the respect of those around you, you could lose your immortal soul for all eternity.
Can I believe that it's essentially a sociopathic ploy to rebuild his personal power base, this time with a serious glory story testimony? Sure. I've seen it done. Hell - if I wanted to go that route, my folks' church would be all about it - I could probably ride my testimony to BECOMING a televangelist . . . but only if I was willing to betray myself, my chosen family, and other GLBT people who are struggling to come out, and live out.
So, I shrug. I withold judgement. I may never know. I live my life. I do what I can, when I can to bring a little more good into the world. I fail. I succeed.
I feel for anyone who struggles with knowing who they are, but the common "Do as I say, not as I do" thing bugs me.
If I have it, I'll send money, but it will be to an orphanage, the senior center or the local animal shelter where I know how it will be used because I can expect an accounting.
and "Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle"
These two phrases are wonderful. I happen to know nothing about this man, but I like your compassion and apparently so too do many here. Thanks, Lainy.
I put him in the category of dangerous personality disordered narcissists who will do anything to feed their never ending self-love. Phew, I feel better.
On self-deception, particularly among public figures...I think part of what drives a person who aggressively seeks a public persona and renown is a compelling need for external validation of their own worth (though isn't this true for all of us to some degree?). I think self deception is just another way of trying to create this same feedback loop from within. For someone whose identity may be tied to their public persona, this must be a desperately hard cycle to break.
That sounds exactly right, as a matter of fact.
For those who come from the evangelical world or, as in Marytkelly's case, from Colorado, where the political influence of said evangelical world is baldly felt, I recognize that your experience trumps mine any day of the week. I vacillate when it comes to compassion for public figures, not only by figure but by day. In other words, if I get enough of Ted Haggard in the next few months, I suppose my own tolerance will wane. It's always a challenge, isn't it?
I know we would like to think that the "Ted Haggard Issue" regards his homosexuality and all the ramifications of that: personal deception, effect on family, living with bifurcated feelings, etc. For those who have not followed his "career" and know nothing of his history I suppose it is easy to come to that conclusion. But I think that is a mistake. I suggest we take out the homosexuality issue completely and look at his "body of work" as a man of the cloth. Even omitting the recent issue about his sexual identity his track record is nothing short of disgusting.
I despised what Ted Haggard stood for long before he was outed. Long before. He was at the forefront of the Evangelical movement in this country that turns the teachings of Christ on its head. He used his winning personality to create a cult of personality around his person just as much as did Jerry Falwell, Jim Bakker, Oral Roberts and all of the other allegedly "Christian" charlatans who have sought to keep their flocks in bondage with threats of hell fire and damnation and to perpetuate their brand of "Christianity" by imposing their beliefs on the people of the nation as a whole by influencing public opinion and governmental decisions not through logic or reason but by emotion and fear.
He was and is a false prophet who gets rich by playing on the emotions and fears of others. And that is one of his better qualities.
So, no, I feel no compassion for him. I could had he faced this latest deceit honestly AND admitted that he has preyed on innocent people who believed in HIM by preaching the gospel of Haggard not the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Rather, he has turned this latest episode into a way to make more money, pull more people into his web of deceit, and convince sincere people to believe that he merely confused to feel sorry for him. I don't. I feel sorry for all the people he bamboozled over the years. They are the ones who deserve our compassion and caring.
Monte
What I find disturbing is this kind of personal material being relayed to friggin' Oprah Winfrey. It's all so...distasteful.
So yes, self-deception happens in all facets of humanity...but when it's broadcast to nth degree like this...ugh, it becomes a new monster in and of itself.
Ted Haggard has my full compassion as does the people who participated with him in those acts and his children and his congregation and those he profited off of, etc., etc. However, keep in mind, people wanted to give this money away, too, and they want to stay stuck in this rigid belief system. Who was really betrayed? It is just another life experience as far as I'm concerned.
Many gay people now want them for their poster child - I can imagine that would be incredibly intimidating and confusing, too. There is a lot of pressure coming from every direction for Ted.
"“You are a heterosexual. With homosexual attachments.”"
I find it interesting that any therapist would tell Ted what his sexual orientation is - that is for him to determine. He was abused as a child, and when that happens, it will affect your sexual bearings. Being raised in a rigid belief system on top of that, where everyone else is invested in you being their golden boy, only adds to the fierceness of the pressure.
Many people believe sexuality is part of a continuum. If any part of this fragile foundation is interrupted, it can take a lot of work to figure out what is what for oneself. To do it in the national spotlight is even harder. While I don't think a therapist should have framed that for Ted, it may be closer to the truth than anyone wants to give credence to.
But he was the leader of an organization dedicated to taking away the rights of not just gay people but of all adults who wish to live like adults and not like children in a Jesus camp. He is or at least was part of America's "religious right" which is rapidly changing the country which put men on the moon into a grotesque caricature of medieval Europe. Mr. Haggard deserves little more than pity and contempt.
Watched "Elmer Gantry" on TCM the other night. Sinclair Lewis's charlatan is downright wholesome compared to Haggard.
Thank-you for the post, I hadn't really thought about feeling sorry for Haggard.
And, he admits to finding guys hot.
But, he doesn't want to fuck them anymore. He just wants to be married and hetero.
Call me old fashioned, but plenty of straight people seem to find themselves not having a lot of sex. With other people, anyway.
I'm sexually attracted to 21 year old women, but manage to live without fucking them.
So, why is it unbelievable that the guy is now keeping it zipped? Banging his wife. And just saying no to the boys?
Do gay people absolutely have no ability to control their urges?
And some notion that once people figure out the true north of their sexual proclivities, everything will work out. Then why aren't all straight people happy as clams with their sex lives?
So, how can people be so sure they fully understand WTF is going on.
Beth--your Oprah Winfrey remark kind of alludes to something that no one brought up and I didn't really even attempt to address. Haggard's demeanor while relating his early abuse and bed wetting was just...weirdly guileless. It's like he is still a kid or something. It was just so not the way anyone I know personally would address such potentially humiliating topics. Something about that exchange is what really made me think he's being honest, at least as he knows it.
So, how can people be so sure they fully understand WTF is going on.
Bingo.
I find it really interesting to see who gets extended compassion in a liberal community. I fall down on the job all over the place, so I'm not judging at all, mind you, just noting that the moral relativism charges against liberals don't hold up consistently. Liberals can be as unforgiving as conservatives if the "sin" in question happens to offend our particular brand of morality. When people like Rush and Hannity complain that for liberals, "anything goes," they discount the depth of our animosity for, for example, abortion doctor killers.
Frankly, it seems to me that liberal morality is upside-down. I think for most people, the fact that Haggard is staying with his wife and trying to make his marriage work, based on the marriage vow that he took, is a good thing. In the liberal world it's a bad thing, "inauthentic" and dishonest.
But I take your point: We each choose whichever life we want, given, of course all our earthly and biological limitations, and he chooses this particular path. I think--and really, this is just me--that this choice would be harder than simply acknowledging the easy categories society has provided for him, but at the end of the day, I respect his choice. And I also acknowledge that there are many, many choices I make that increase the difficulty of my own existence and facile categorization, foremost the decision to be a teacher without certification. But it is exhausting.
rori said "the worst lies we ever tell are the lies we tell to ourselves." Yet many of the responses here seem to have a tone of absolving dishonesty if its foundation is self-deception, as if people who lie to themselves can't know better.
I think self-deception is something you have to work at and those who practice it assiduously have to direct all their resources at maintaining it. Invariably they hurt pretty much everyone they influence because nothing matters as much as that - as hiding whatever it is they're hiding from. The more power they have over other people the more damage they do.
In my experience, the deeply self-deceptive are deeply narcissistic so it follows that the harm they do to others does not matter, probably does not even register in any honest way - maybe a cursory nod because it's an expected component of the facade.
Can it be overcome? Is the narcissistic or sociopathic personality fundamentally incurable? I really don't know. What I know is that all my life I have seen people work really, really hard at maintaining self-deception, so much so it tells me that it's really, really necessary to them. Bit it also seems that if takes such hard work and often personal pain to maintain it, it has to be something that can be lost.
What this amounts to in Haggard's case, if he hadn't used a therapist who could maintain the lies by concluding, “You are a heterosexual. With homosexual attachments” he wouldn't even have put three weeks into it. He'd have been out of there during the first session.
.
Is there any meaningful difference between the label 'bisexual' and 'heterosexual with homosexual attachments'?
This is putting a very fine point on it. If he is, indeed, bisexual -- then it seems to me that he is authentic enough. If he is really gay and in denial, not so much. But, I don't have finely tuned gadar and I think that simply taking him at his word, having come out as pretty weird, isn't all that far fetched.
I just have this feeling that people tend to put way too much emphasis on cultural norms as impediments to their happiness. I will be surprised if, in say a decade or two, we won't start seeing truly awful gay divorces and gay military tyrants. I suspect that gays are more or less like everyone else, give or take their sexual orientation.
Anyway, you're probably right about the word authentic. At the end of the day, I was defining authenticity for Haggard. I suppose he has made his own authentic choice, messy and difficult as it seems to me.
Lets say he switches teams and announces he is gay. I don't see happiness for him just by switching teams.
The world is much too nuanced. Just saying.
Joe
And speaking of bisexuality --
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjKpPerVuU0
Thanks to all who recently commented--I appreciate your views. nerdcred, yours is interesting, the idea that it takes some time and effort to create a web of self-deception. Very interesting, indeed. You assume these people are narcissistic or sociopathic, but I'm wondering about plain avoidant. There used to be something the DSM called Avoidant Personality Disorder that they now call Social Anxiety Disorder. It involves tremendous avoidance about stuff to keep humiliation at bay. He doesn't fit the bill, to me (great, now I'm playing psychologist)--I think narcissism fit better--but I'm just throwing it out there.
He's just so fabulous.
Just as Mrs. Haggard has profited from her hubby's adultery with an "inspirational" memori, the Cheever family has made a cottage industry out of "My Life with Dad" books.
I've been called a lot of things, but never heterosexist. Guilty as charged.
Seriously, I saw Haggard's wife on television, and was impressed with how unchanged they seemed to be. Her, anyway.
Whatever the value of my theoretical arguments, the reality is that I have changed my mind. They are lost.
It's a different way of looking at it than I can imagine many might feel if they were married to a partner who found the other gender super hot. I guess I'm trying to say that I felt some compassion (in addition to irritation and some eye rolling) for her too. She's the definite product of a certain way of looking at the world and although I can per my background *understand* it, I also can't quite *understand* it.
Lately I find it very hard to suffer fools. I elevate compassion, I practice it, i have been tested and I know I have it -- then i get some wicked thought or become so impatient with some beknighted fool.
Thank you for this reminder. Thank you for the insanely great video, and the balanced and well-considered profile.
Secondly, I see the inadequacy of attempting to fit human sexuality into a binary system.
There is a tremendous parallel between religious thought and binary thought. They both attempt to interpret the world through a black/white lens; good/bad, male/female, gay/straight, virtuous/sinful, believer/non-believer. These are simplistic systems for simple minds, a reassuring way of looking at and labeling a complex world, a world which confounds simplistic solutions at every turn.
Thanks for the comments on my blog - I have only just found them, as I haven't been around for a while. There is some more stuff on language and language teaching on my 'main blog' at www.giaklamata.blogspot.com
I don't think the popular dualistic label even begins to explain something so complex as human sexuality, so I tend to allow people to interpret/explain their sexuality when and where and to whom they wish, and avoid insisting they adhere to what I consider an unsophisticated system.