We all know the sad, stupid story of Ted Haggard, mega-church preacher forced into exile from the religious right after his meth habit and affair with a male prostitute came to light.When I first heard about what he'd done, I couldn't help but laugh at the irony. Here's a man who has built a career on a facade of moral rectitude, raking in hundreds of thousands of dollars by preaching a hateful and judgmental theology to the masses.
As poor an emotion as schadenfreude is, there's some times when it's the only reasonable response.
But now, Ted's back. In an article in GQ, he spills his guts to Kevin Roose, famed journalistic infiltrator of that center for evangelical education, Liberty University.
I began Roose's article with a profound sense of skepticism, but by the time I had finished... well... that hadn't actually changed. I still don't believe a word that comes out of Haggard's mouth. In spite of this, I can't help but feel a sort of sad pity for him, and, maybe, a faint hope that he might build himself up into a force for (at least a little) good now that he's had his whole life torn down around him.
A few points of interest:
The first thing I noticed was that Haggard came across as remarkably human.When you see public figures in the headlines and on the news, it's easy to forget that they're people, individuals with fears, desires, and families all their own. I don't know how much of the interaction portrayed is a fabrication and how much is genuine, but it's obvious that the scandal has deeply damaged Ted's home life. If he were anyone else but a megachurch pastor, I'd feel sorry for him.
The thing that really stood out to me was Haggard's surprisingly frank discussion of his own sexuality. While the narrative he spun shouldn't be taken at face value, I think his admission of his own bisexuality is something that says a lot. Either he's finally decided that the "completely heterosexual" meme is impossible to sustain, and is putting something else out there, or legitimately telling the truth. Is Haggard bi? Only he knows that for sure.
Of course, I've heard a lot of chatter from LGBT folk about this. The main joke seems to be that he's on a "bi now, gay later" plan. Could this be the case? Sure. The man has a family, and he's struggling to stitch together his tattered image. Saying "I'm gay!" would bring all that crashing down. Bi's a reasonable alternative.
But it could also be the truth, and this is a point I've thought on for quite a while. The prevalence of same-sex scandals in right wing Christian circles is pretty hard to ignore (Mark Foley, Larry Craig, Bob Allen, George Rekers, and Ted himself). There's obviously a correlation here. But some of these guys are family men, people with wives and children. Sure, it's easy to dismiss them as cover, but what if they aren't? What if they're bisexuals? It would explain a lot about the right wing narrative, about how being gay is a choice, and how homosexual attraction is something that must be struggled against, like all sinful temptations.
Of course, nobody really likes this idea. The preachers hate it because it forces them to define sexuality based on attraction, instead of behavior, something that undermines their argument about homosexuality being sinful. The gay folks hate it because, let's face it, it's satisfying to watch assholes try to pray the gay away. And the people in the middle (myself included) hate it because it just adds to the misconception that bisexuals can't keep it in our pants.
But I digress...
A large part of the article is dedicated to Haggard's new church, St. James. I'll admit that I'm not overly thrilled with the idea of Haggard starting up a new church. I'm pretty sick of hearing about him, and of course the last thing the world needs is another place of worship. St. James, though, seems like it might be a step in the right direction. Haggard says that his new church isn't about judging people. Gay, straight, clean cut, or in rehab, the church exists as a support group for the community. While I'd prefer that people came together to help each other without the bullshit blather of religion in the background, I'll take St. James over New Life any day of the week.
I don't know if Haggard can be trusted. I don't know if he's honestly trying to do some good, or if he's just desperately trying to stay relevant as a means to cling to the spotlight, but he's shown a remarkable ability to draw crowds in the past. If he can do that with a new sort of message, then I think it's all for the better. I'd like for everyone to put religion behind them, but failing that, I think the world would be a better place with less fundamentalism, and if it takes turning hard liners into moderates to do that, then so be it.
0 comments:
Post a Comment