Related articles and links |  1 of 16

1. Haggard story is moving on
The election is over, with no sign of a "Haggard Effect." And with Haggard himself staying away from the cameras, even the Colorado media has stopped running daily updates about the scandal. There are, however, some interesting updates on the story.

First comes news that not all members of New Life Church will be able to vote on Haggard's successor at the church. "Only those who can prove they have contributed money to the church during the tax year 2005 will be able to vote in the selection process to choose Haggard's successor in the pulpit," Pueblo Chieftain columnist Chuck Green reports. A church spokesman tells him that a tax statement or church receipt are, "in a sense, your admission ticket."

Green is upset, since many church donors don't ask for receipts and don't seek tax deductions. "Poll taxes have been outlawed in elections in the United States, but not in Pastor Ted Haggard's New Life Church," he complains. "Money—combined with moral conduct—now becomes a qualifier for membership in God's house."

Green doesn't note that this rule is extremely common. Some Episcopal Churches, for example, also have the requirement, for example. At a church like New Life, which literally gets tourists in its pews every week, you'd think that demonstrating some kind of commitment to the church would be an important prerequisite in choosing a leader.

Another interesting note comes from Lou Sheldon of the Traditional Values Coalition, in an interview with The Jewish Week:

Sheldon disclosed that he and "a lot" of others knew about Haggard's homosexuality "for a while … but we weren't sure just how to deal with it."

Months before a male prostitute publicly revealed Haggard's secret relationship with him, and the reverend's drug use as well, "Ted and I had a discussion," explained Sheldon, who said Haggard gave him a telltale signal then: "He said homosexuality is genetic. I said, no it isn't. But I just knew he was covering up. They need to say that."

The Jewish Week journalist e-mailed the full text of the comments to Lexington Herald-Leader religion reporter Frank Lockwood. It turns out that Sheldon didn't say "a lot," but he did say he knew about Haggard's problem. Here's the full quote:

We're all sinners. Some of us hide our sins better than others. Ted, who I've talked to on this issue—some of us have known for a while he had this problem. We weren't sure just how to deal with it. Finally the escort blew it out of the water.

He and I had a discussion. He said homosexuality is genetic. I said no it isn't. Never have amer acad of sciences or other scientific bodies found such a consensus. I just knw he was covering up. They NEED to say that.

So Sheldon knew that Haggard "was covering up" and had "known for a while that he had this problem" and did nothing? Sheldon is a pariah among religious conservative groups, but surely someone at New Life Church or the National Association of Evangelicals would have taken his call on this. Here's the phrase of the day, friends: culpable negligence.

But maybe Sheldon thinks that everyone who believes in a biological basis for homosexual attraction is gay. Or maybe he's lying about having known.

Oh, and by the way, we've received several messages demanding that we condemn Mark Driscoll for saying that a factor in many Christian leaders' sexual failure is that it "is not uncommon to meet pastors' wives who really let themselves go; they sometimes feel that because their husband is a pastor, he is therefore trapped into fidelity, which gives them cause for laziness." Driscoll has an update: "Contrary to some who misrepresented my prior blog, Gayle is in no way responsible for the sin of her husband and by all accounts seems to have been a lovely and devoted wife." Driscoll could do better; his earlier comment sends an incorrect message to any woman whose husband has cheated on her. Our wives should not be made to feel that they have to "compete" for their husband's affections against a potential adulteress—or a male prostitute.

next page... |  1 of 16

November (Web-only) 2006, Vol. 50